EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 4260
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15742 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States43643 Posts
On July 13 2024 00:57 Mohdoo wrote: Imagine dems finally eject this idiot and he tries to run third party. But ultimately the process of acquiring the PDF and uploading the completed form prevents it He’d have people for that. Biden’s presidency has been pretty good by pretty much any metric. The best inflation reduction in the western world, massively reduced deficits from the Trump years, the strongest economic growth in the western world, strong jobs market etc. If we are to conclude that he can’t turn on his own computer then we must also conclude that he has a reasonably strong team. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23672 Posts
Some major Democratic donors have told the largest pro-Biden super PAC, Future Forward, that pledges worth roughly $90 million are now on hold if President Biden remains atop the ticket, according to two people who have been briefed on the conversations. www.nytimes.com | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On July 13 2024 01:11 KwarK wrote: He’d have people for that. Biden’s presidency has been pretty good by pretty much any metric. The best inflation reduction in the western world, massively reduced deficits from the Trump years, the strongest economic growth in the western world, strong jobs market etc. If we are to conclude that he can’t turn on his own computer then we must also conclude that he has a reasonably strong team. No one is arguing right now about Biden's performance as President from 2020-2024. The concern is that the guy is deteriorating before our very eyes and we are going to give him ANOTHER 4 years? What's he going to look like 2 years from now? It's simply irresponsible to see this kind of thing and say "oh sure Grandpa you're ok to drive the car for another 4 years, I'll just go sit in back and put my seatbelt on and pretend it's all ok." The warning signs have been there for a while now. Biden should have done the responsible thing and stepped down after one term, and for whatever reason he didn't, and now we are where we are. The fact he hasn't stepped down, and is fighting this, is a bigger warning sign to me than any of his gaffes.He already won the fight he needed to win, he got Trump and MAGA out of the White House. Quit while you're ahead Joe and let someone else take over, don't ride your success until the wheels fall off and it all ends up being for naught. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15742 Posts
On July 13 2024 01:11 KwarK wrote: He’d have people for that. Biden’s presidency has been pretty good by pretty much any metric. The best inflation reduction in the western world, massively reduced deficits from the Trump years, the strongest economic growth in the western world, strong jobs market etc. If we are to conclude that he can’t turn on his own computer then we must also conclude that he has a reasonably strong team. Its not about that. He has my full and complete support and I'd have zero problem voting for him. The issue is that mental decline is not always linear. And with all of this context/history, if he had an "actually bad" moment significantly beyond what we have seen so far, it would probably be game over. Just to be totally clear: I view Biden's current situation, exactly as he is, as entirely fine. But if he ends up much worse in October, there will be zero hope. It will be game over. Its just too big a risk IMO. | ||
|
Severedevil
United States4839 Posts
On July 13 2024 03:45 Vindicare605 wrote: No one is arguing right now about Biden's performance as President from 2020-2024. The concern is that the guy is deteriorating before our very eyes and we are going to give him ANOTHER 4 years? What's he going to look like 2 years from now? Realistically he's going to look like the same team of administrators and advisors as before. The point of a big boss is to set a general direction and pick capable people to do the actual work. | ||
|
Husyelt
United States837 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45332 Posts
On July 13 2024 11:42 Husyelt wrote: is it over for team Kamala replacement after this speech today? im in full doomer mode What was said? | ||
|
Husyelt
United States837 Posts
He just looked a bit sharper and was more aggressive towards Trump, i can see him getting a tiny boost and his aides pointing to it as a comeback. And then we dont get Kamala and lose in November. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15742 Posts
On July 13 2024 11:55 Husyelt wrote: He just looked a bit sharper and was more aggressive towards Trump, i can see him getting a tiny boost and his aides pointing to it as a comeback. And then we dont get Kamala and lose in November. Pelosi and major donors wouldn’t behave the way they have been without a great deal of certainty regarding the situation. I think the reality is that he can have good days and it doesn’t mean the fundamental issue doesn’t exist. The situation ends up somewhat self defined. If we assume Pelosi and a major donor group would only be so direct and public if they knew it was game over, it’s likely game over. They must believe it’s possible Biden will tank the election due to cognitive decline before the election in 4 months. You could even argue the election being so soon supports the idea that Biden is an actual risk. The election is so close that most cognitive situations could still be reasonably managed with confidence for 6 months. If people are hitting big red buttons with only 4 months to hold on, their info indicates his situation is bad enough for 4 months to be dicey he’ll either entirely stop doing events or something else will happen | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On July 13 2024 11:21 Severedevil wrote: Realistically he's going to look like the same team of administrators and advisors as before. The point of a big boss is to set a general direction and pick capable people to do the actual work. Except we don't get to elect those administrators and advisors. We don't have a say in any of them. The Office of President is the only one that we get to vote for and that's the one where the guy that is supposed to be instilling confidence that he can do the job for another 4 years and he is doing the exact opposite. | ||
|
SC-Shield
Bulgaria837 Posts
Of course, democrats could have put someone younger like Michelle Obama and win easily against Trump but this is one of things I'll probably never understand why. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18227 Posts
On July 13 2024 17:09 SC-Shield wrote: As a non-US citizen, the vote looks to me like a vote between a person with cognitive decline (not his fault) and a person with better cognitive abilities, but an extreme narcissist who is willing to destroy everything in his way for his gain. I'd still pick Biden over the psycho. Easy. Of course, democrats could have put someone younger like Michelle Obama and win easily against Trump but this is one of things I'll probably never understand why. Well, they could definitely have found someone better than Biden, but not Michelle Obama. She has said about a billion times she has no interest in politics. She has held no office and her singular qualification is that she's married to Barrack. Why the hell would you suggest her? And yes, she'd obviously be better than Trump. Then again, so would a geranium. | ||
|
SC-Shield
Bulgaria837 Posts
On July 13 2024 17:29 Acrofales wrote: Well, they could definitely have found someone better than Biden, but not Michelle Obama. She has said about a billion times she has no interest in politics. She has held no office and her singular qualification is that she's married to Barrack. Why the hell would you suggest her? And yes, she'd obviously be better than Trump. Then again, so would a geranium. So what? Trump didn't hold office before 2016 either. Ronald Reagan was a mere actor before he became a president. Significant political background isn't required to be elected. Yes, I know she said she wasn't interested in politics. The point is democrats could have put anyone with slightly above average rating from public figures and still beat Trump easily. Why they make it so hard for themselves is inexplicable to me. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22121 Posts
On July 13 2024 11:21 Severedevil wrote: But that same capable team could work for any Democratic President.Realistically he's going to look like the same team of administrators and advisors as before. The point of a big boss is to set a general direction and pick capable people to do the actual work. So why not have a big boss that is mentally all here? | ||
|
Byo
Canada210 Posts
I don't quite think he is oblivious to his own decline, so what factors could be at play that would lead to him taking the stance he is taking today. If there has been steep decline from when it was the right time to call a primary, then all the more reason to see it as proof that things may not be so smooth down the path of another 4 years. Perhaps he is still POTUS so will insist he is fine, but will cede to which ever candidate arises. Perhaps the job of the POTUS isn't as physically demanding as people say, and it's all a team effort so in reality the decline really doesn't come into play. But the increase in travel/time zone can't be a positive even if the effects are reduced with medication and comfort. He has no choice? Well I don't know what could cause that in absolute terms, but who knows. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22121 Posts
On July 13 2024 22:34 Byo wrote: Because the moment he brings it up he is done for. What I question about Biden might be what he thinks of his own decline, and the overall impact on the importance and duty as the POTUS. I don't quite think he is oblivious to his own decline, so what factors could be at play that would lead to him taking the stance he is taking today. If there has been steep decline from when it was the right time to call a primary, then all the more reason to see it as proof that things may not be so smooth down the path of another 4 years. Perhaps he is still POTUS so will insist he is fine, but will cede to which ever candidate arises. Perhaps the job of the POTUS isn't as physically demanding as people say, and it's all a team effort so in reality the decline really doesn't come into play. But the increase in travel/time zone can't be a positive even if the effects are reduced with medication and comfort. He has no choice? Well I don't know what could cause that in absolute terms, but who knows. He may well legit think he is the best chance to beating Trump but the moment he himself publicly expresses doubt about his ability, how can the DNC stand behind him as a candidate? | ||
|
Severedevil
United States4839 Posts
On July 13 2024 17:58 SC-Shield wrote: So what? Trump didn't hold office before 2016 either. Ronald Reagan was a mere actor before he became a president. Ronald Reagan was the governor of California before he ran for president. On July 13 2024 18:03 Gorsameth wrote: But that same capable team could work for any Democratic President. So why not have a big boss that is mentally all here? Agreed, that would be better. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15742 Posts
On July 13 2024 18:03 Gorsameth wrote: But that same capable team could work for any Democratic President. So why not have a big boss that is mentally all here? When people argue against replacing Biden, they aren’t saying he’s the best possible choice for a president. They are saying replacing him is a bigger risk than keeping him. It’s all about keeping Trump out of the white house. When people who are terrified of a Trump presidency disagree on this topi , the core of the issue is how we compare the risk of each choice. I think it’s important to keep that in mind. | ||
| ||
