The Biden Presidency - 2020

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

CBS News as well. Seems the major media are all suggesting this looked like a military threat to the MAGA crowd.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

as it should be. They wanna cosplay about a civil war.

[Atocep]

Trump spent 4 years catering to the minority in this country while attacking everyone else so I think it's funny that every time a democrat president speaks the GOP keys on divisiveness.

[JPhillips]

This will play to MAGA, but it's hard to convince suburban voters that Biden is the real threat after 1/6. The GOP literally tried to overthrow the government already.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

CBS News as well. Seems the major media are all suggesting this looked like a military threat to the MAGA crowd.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

These outlets are filled with pea brained morons.

[whomario]

The use of military as background is at most a direct response to De Santis, no ? Have people seen the theater that guy puts up when he does his stage productions basking about his discriminating, smearing and othering ?

Or maybe this:



(As he smears 4 democratic congresswomen)

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

CBS News as well. Seems the major media are all suggesting this looked like a military threat to the MAGA crowd.

The mentioned CNN has a new owner who is ultra conservative and CBS shift to both sideism should be common knowledge after that Infamous production meeting and hiring people like Mulvaney. Others continue to publish insane Op Eds that are text book examples of creating false balance.

Why Fox News-loving billionaire John Malone wants to remake CNN - Vox

Why did CBS News hire Mick Mulvaney? | US news | The Guardian

Overall it has been worrying how US media has failed time and time again to consistently call a spade a spade, so to speak. (And lest anyone thinks i just want to just thrash the US: Similar shit is happening or emerging in Europe of course). For all their pathos (democracy dies in darkness, eh ?) and occasional semi-shocked opinion section outbursts of "oh shit, there's a problem, isn't there ?" the majority is still most of the time treating crazy gravediggers of democracy like regular politicians and refusing to dig to deep for fear of their bottom line. Like the questions getting answered via election is wether you a bit more or less taxes or some Shit. They publish some mildly outraged Opinion Pieces but the actual news coverage still covers this shit like (and i mean more than content but the way it's presented and structured as well as framed via headlines etc) it's just some difference of opinion/priorities that differentiate the crazy parade from those actually willing to uphold principles of democracy. Why yes, of course they have been "critical" of Trumpism, Maga and it's offshoots. But that's the lowest bar possible considering how crazy it was and is.

How the press covered the last four years of Trump - Columbia Journalism Review

How The Media Failed In Covering Donald Trump : NPR

Which is a problem considering the media landscape (and i say media in it's technical definition, including non-traditional outlets) is skewed as it is. The Right is simply more active here and uninhibited by 'their' Party getting the sweats everytime anybody seems 'radical' or goes on/gets interviewed on a 'radical' blog/podcast/online channel.

Why the Media Is Worse for Biden Than Trump

Press “bothsideism� has failed Biden, and America

The way things are going a Republican majority controll of congress and presidency might well mean that for a looooong time (because the ongoing efforts of gerrymandering make it ever more likely for Rs to win) there will be a concerted effort to further shift wealth to the top and seriously gut civil liberties for many millions of americans. And yes, seeing the crazy zealots already (!) elected or on the ballot to positions directly charged with overseeing elections: There is an immediate danger that the next presidential election, never mind local ones, will not be free and fair.

At Least 120 Republican Nominees Deny The Results Of The 2020 Election | FiveThirtyEight

BTW : De Santis just launched a full on smear campaign against Christs running mate based on a rumour by the premier anti trans activist group on social media (who are spearheading the mob descending on childrens hospitals) whose source article does not even say what they claim. How is that not reported everywhere major? (or is it ?) And good luck to the idiots thinking that leopard will be content eating those faces.

https://popular.info/p/desantis-prom...-smear-against

[whomario]

Will people please accept that "unity" by offering the proverbial olive branch will not happen without major concessions of democratic processes and Institutions, human and civil rights, quality of life (incl basic health) of current and future generations ?

I have no idea what a actively and purposefully confrontational approach will yield but considering how blatantly obvious the aims of the GOP, Maga et al have been, how little willingness to change (even to 'only' the more subtle ways of before) has been shown while the democrats largely tiptoed the line tried to reach compromise ... Might as well go for broke unless you are just willing to turn back the clock decades for a lot of areas. And Biden still is trying hard to offer that branch by distinguishing between what in reality has become an increasingly thin gap between "regular" Republicans and those he condems.

[cuervo72]

"Unity" for that side is just "accept our reality and our terms."

[Ksyrup]

While it's BS, it absolutely makes sense from their side to paint this as a politically motivated speech as if this is a "politics as usual" time in our country and it's as if he's railing against the GOP after nominating Bob frickin Dole or something. This is just another way for them to normalize themselves as "like for like.".

Of course, left out there is that he clearly was targeting "utra-MAGA" and the response has been, "this is an attack on 50% of the country." Not really, dude. And if it is, we're truly fucked.

[albionmoonlight]

President Biden was very clear that he was talking about MAGA specifically and not the GOP more broadly. But of course the GOP has to try and make it that he was attacking all conservatives.

The parties are currently fighting for the support of the moderate-right leaning voters who don't want to replace the United States with a white nationalist Christian dictatorship but who also support lower taxes and are suspicious of how quickly we are accepting things like the Trans-rights agenda and the like.

President Biden, of course, wants to say "Hey, I disagree with y'all on policy, but that's just the normal back and forth, and I need y'all to join with other Americans to fight fascism right now so we can go back to just disagreeing about taxes." The GOP wants to say "Biden is attacking you, so you need to remain with us to fight back against him."

Not sure how they are receiving the message.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

"Unity" for that side is just "accept our reality and our terms."

Which side defines it differently?

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Uncle Joe is not a brawler.

I dunno, I feel that was explicitly his role in the 2008 and 2012 campaigns, especially when you look at Obama's personality. Malarkey!

Originally Posted by JPhillips

This will play to MAGA, but it's hard to convince suburban voters that Biden is the real threat after 1/6.

Suburban voters of both parties want normalcy above all else. And the ones you could convince to vote for Trump to get rid of Roe are now back in play.

[Toddzilla]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Which side defines it differently?

That's a great point. Anyone with a shred of self-awareness should feel the same.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

I dunno, I feel that was explicitly
Suburban voters of both parties want normalcy above all else. And the ones you could convince to vote for Trump to get rid of Roe are now back in play.

You really think so? From my experience, the people who would vote Trump solely for Roe reasons are those who also buy into the broader culture war agenda and see the left taking us into chaos of no gender, demonizing white Christians, etc. If you did a venn diagram, I feel like it's a pretty small subset of people who are totally against abortion and now that the SC has fixed that, they can vote Democrat.

[JPhillips]

Are MAGAs fascists, is pretty poor ground for the GOP to choose to fight.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

While it's BS, it absolutely makes sense from their side to paint this as a politically motivated speech as if this is a "politics as usual" time in our country and it's as if he's railing against the GOP after nominating Bob frickin Dole or something. This is just another way for them to normalize themselves as "like for like.".

Of course, left out there is that he clearly was targeting "utra-MAGA" and the response has been, "this is an attack on 50% of the country." Not really, dude. And if it is, we're truly fucked.

Even NPR this morning was talking about how this was a political speech so the media still clearly hasn't figured out how to deal with Trump and the potential slide to fascism.

SI

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

You really think so? From my experience, the people who would vote Trump solely for Roe reasons are those who also buy into the broader culture war agenda and see the left taking us into chaos of no gender, demonizing white Christians, etc. If you did a venn diagram, I feel like it's a pretty small subset of people who are totally against abortion and now that the SC has fixed that, they can vote Democrat.

These are fair points. I should be clear that I'm not necessarily talking about huge numbers of people, but as we've seen, you don't necessarily need huge numbers of people to swing states in the EC.

You actually saw some of this in 2018 in suburban/exurban Chicago voting, where Democrats consolidated strength in districts they already held (e.g. 10th district) and flipped two districts (6th & 14th) that had been in GOP hands for 40+ and 30+ years, respectively, defeating multi-term incumbents.

Both the 6th and the 14th remain in Democratic hands and Cook labels them currently as Lean and Likely Democratic for 2022.

I have a lot of Republican neighbors and over the past few years a number have certainly articulated why they abandoned Trump and the GOP, but for me it all comes back to wanting some semblance of normalcy.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by whomario

The use of military as background is at most a direct response to De Santis, no ?

Well, and also Trump, as you point out.

I mean, this is a guy (Trump) who badgered the Armed Forces into doing a full-on military parade in DC that they didn't want to do (because, for one, it's an enormous waste of money).

[whomario]

This is where we are now. https://t.co/mKN8VCuL2p pic.twitter.com/Ft7Ze6OYv2

— Jay Rosen (@jayrosen_nyu) September 2, 2022

(He is 65, so might have been thinking about retiring anyway but i doubt he does it this suddenly for no reason)

[bronconick]

CNN is going to end up being the new OAN because they're going to lose the small following they have now and MAGAs aren't leaving FNC

[Flasch186]

crazy turn of media events there.

[JPhillips]

Harwood said he was notified a month ago that he would be let go today. I think it's still for being seen as anti-Trump, but it wasn't specifically these comments.

It does seem clear, though, that the new investors are demanding a rightward turn for CNN. Where the space is between Fox and OAN and Newsmax and Lindell and Truth, etc isn't clear to me.

[RainMaker]

I guess financially it makes sense. The audience for cable news is pretty old and older folks skew conservative or whatever it is they're doing these days.

[Ksyrup]

We went over to my wife's parents house on a Saturday afternoon, and they had Fox News on. What possible reason is there for watching any 24 hour news/opinion channel in the middle of a Saturday? For chrissakes, watch a Hallmark movie or something! How can anyone want to listen to that kind of stuff, even if you agree with it, for hours on end?

[whomario]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Harwood said he was notified a month ago that he would be let go today. I think it's still for being seen as anti-Trump, but it wasn't specifically these comments.

Actually wasn't my impression either, though in hindsight i can certainly see that the tweet posted makes that implicit allegation. I actually only posted it as it contained both his comment and the link to his farewell. Originally only posted the picture but that was like super huge and i was too lazy to edit on the phone ... I saw it more as him using his airtime (was a live statement on air) one last time to speak out in defiance over the shift.

[GrantDawg]

All I know is CNN was the news network I generally went to, but I will not any longer. I really don't get who they think their viewers are going to be.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[PilotMan]

I just want to know if the MAGA are finally going to stop threatening and actually do something now.

Biden called them out, and once again, they are calling for Civil War. If they would just do something we could label them American ISIS, call them a terrorist group and then, they might feel attacked for real, with the full force of the democracy and the country on their backs coming for them.

I mean....MTG has now fully gone on record as calling Biden, Hitler....Yep...He is now Hitler.

Same shit different day. Fuck that bitch.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I just want to know if the MAGA are finally going to stop threatening and actually do something now.

Biden called them out, and once again, they are calling for Civil War. If they would just do something we could label them American ISIS, call them a terrorist group and then, they might feel attacked for real, with the full force of the democracy and the country on their backs coming for them.

I mean....MTG has now fully gone on record as calling Biden, Hitler....Yep...He is now Hitler.

Same shit different day. Fuck that bitch.

Well at CPac they were already calling themselves domestic terrorists

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I just want to know if the MAGA are finally going to stop threatening and actually do something now.

Biden called them out, and once again, they are calling for Civil War. If they would just do something we could label them American ISIS, call them a terrorist group and then, they might feel attacked for real, with the full force of the democracy and the country on their backs coming for them.

I mean....MTG has now fully gone on record as calling Biden, Hitler....Yep...He is now Hitler.

Same shit different day. Fuck that bitch.

I'm really tired of it. Trump actually tried to deploy troops against US Citizens, constantly attacked Dems in statements and speeches, led a failed coup attempt, and so on and so on and so on.

Biden, in one speech, calls out a subset of the republican party for their bullshit and he's compared to hitler, is threatening US citizens, wants to start a civil war, ect.

At this point I'm with you. I'm tired of the talk. Either do something or just fucking stop it. It's tiresome.

[Lathum]

cue the faux outrage

Biden responds to heckler: Let him go. Everyone is entitled to be an idiot pic.twitter.com/fFbeiHcMAt

— Acyn (@Acyn) September 5, 2022

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Biden, in one speech, calls out a subset of the republican party for their bullshit

The tack I would have taken with the way the GOP responded would have been to challenge passive Trump voters (those who vote GOP because of tribe and for general positions (taxes, etc.)) on whether they agree with their own party leaders and used their own very specific words against them, asking whether those are the things they believe in.

We have to do something to force people to draw a line in the sand. You don't even have to intimate their positions or be partisan - many in the GOP clearly spell out their intentions, in non-ambiguous terms. USE IT! Instead of just attacking/calling names, give specific examples. Call out specific people. Put them on the defensive, having to explain indefensible statements.

[JPhillips]

Leonard Leo, the guy that ran the Federalist Society and flooded the court with right-wing justices, and others looking to help the court end democracy.

Leonard Leo's "Honest Elections Project" files Supreme Court brief arguing state legislatures are not constrained by even state constitutions protecting voting rights when they regulate federal elections. https://t.co/iNdZVMSjls

— Rick Hasen (@rickhasen) September 7, 2022

[PilotMan]

ugh, that all these extremely extreme points of view, that have been considered highly extremist for decades, are now being pushed into mainstream thought, and have a less than 0 chance to see increasing support across courts, and public opinion makes me nauseous. It's almost like McVeigh and Nichols have finally become martyrs for a cause the world now believes in. Ask the right if that's what they support and I bet you they have record high marks across the ideology now.

[Atocep]

Yet another issue where Oz and I disagree https://t.co/g2Veh2R5Cr

— John Fetterman (@JohnFetterman) September 6, 2022

[Edward64]

Had to look it up. FWIW, don't think Oz is incorrect.

Do second cousins have a high risk of having a child with a disability? | The Tech Interactive

Most likely not. In most cases second cousins are far enough apart that there is only a little increased risk.

Of course this doesn’t mean there is no risk. Everyone who has children has the risk of having a child with a disability.

The chance that a baby is born with a birth defect or disability is between 2-3%. So, if a hundred people have babies, we would expect that 2 or 3 to be born with some sort of problem. Which of course means that 97 or 98 are fine.

At 3.5%, the risk is slightly higher for second cousins. Still, 96 or 97 out of a hundred babies are born without any major problems.

What this all means is that while there is increased risk, it doesn’t really qualify as a “high chance.” Even first cousins at 5% aren’t that big of a risk.

But then there is always this ...

[sovereignstar v2]

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Had to look it up. FWIW, don't think Oz is incorrect.

Do second cousins have a high risk of having a child with a disability? | The Tech Interactive


But then there is always this ...

There are some really funny stories out there about couples that have found out they were related thanks to 23 and me and Ancestry. From same and opposite sex siblings where they were ok with staying together to a 4th cousin pairing who started vomiting on site, thought she was now totally scandalous and was going to divorce her husband without pause.

[Ksyrup]

I find it odd/disturbing that it's the scientific issues around "how close is too close for inbreeding purposes" that seem to be the sole determining factor on whether that is a good or desirable outcome.

[JPhillips]

TX federal judge rules that a business doesn't have to cover PreP in their insurance due to religious reasons. I guess getting AIDS is now the Christian thing to do.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I find it odd/disturbing that it's the scientific issues around "how close is too close for inbreeding purposes" that seem to be the sole determining factor on whether that is a good or desirable outcome.

It's possible to be correct but still wrong.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I find it odd/disturbing that it's the scientific issues around "how close is too close for inbreeding purposes" that seem to be the sole determining factor on whether that is a good or desirable outcome.

I find the social aspect interesting. If someone turns out to be your fourth cousin, then why would that be a socially stigmatizing? Seems like to me absent of the "inbreeding" issue, a fourth cousin is as much a stranger as anyone else. I couldn't name a fourth cousin, nor would we likely have much of a family relation connection. First and second cousins, sure. Grand parents, great grand parents, aunts and uncles, that is close relations that is icky. But if you are far enough out that you can't even recall relatives in common? Why is that even a big deal?

[Ksyrup]

Well, to be clear, Oz specifically said "more than 1st cousin" which makes 2nd cousin fair game. Again, apparently solely based on the fact that it might not screw things up genetically. But that's not the only consideration.

I suppose it depends on the circumstances, but I know extended families that are pretty close, so even 3rd/4th cousin might be awkward to say the least. A whole branch of your family that lives 2 time zones away that you've never met? Maybe not an issue.

[Ksyrup]

When reading this, I also had in the back of my mind an actual petri dish scenario that is playing out in Indiana with the fertility doctor who inseminated upwards of 100 women with his own sperm - the majority of whom live within 25 miles of each other - and some of the resulting babies having their own children and finding it necessary to do background checks on other kids that their kids want to date. It's not just what society thinks of you, but people actually thrown into these circumstances overwhelmingly are repulsed by it.

[sabotai]

I'll bet there's lots of people married to their 4th cousin and don't know it. Most people don't move far from where they grew up, and 4th cousin means you share one pair of great-great-great grandparents. I doubt most people can even name a single great-great-great grand parent.

People have hundreds, if not thousands, of 4th cousins, depending on how many kids each generation had (and those generations in the great grandparent to great-great-great grandparent range had quite a few).

[Ksyrup]

Why are we focusing on 4th cousins when Oz never went beyond 3rd?

[GrantDawg]

Pilotman's comment on someone freaking out when they found out they were dating their fourth cousin. I have also seen/heard people freak out about any kindship in different media. What Dr. Oz said was stupid.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[JPhillips]

Lindsey Graham is going to introduce a national ban on abortion after some unknown amount of weeks. I get what he's trying to do, find a middle grouund, but I don't see any cutoff that will both appease the anti folks and get the pro-abortion majority to let things lie.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Lindsey Graham is going to introduce a national ban on abortion after some unknown amount of weeks. I get what he's trying to do, find a middle grouund, but I don't see any cutoff that will both appease the anti folks and get the pro-abortion majority to let things lie.

The GOP is desperately trying to rebrand as being the party of abortion limits rather than the party of abortion bans.

[Edward64]

I really like this idea Joe.

Did you budget any funding for this moonshot? Seriously, a great idea. Just provide a lot of funding (if not already), otherwise it's just empty words.

Biden makes a passionate plea: 'Beating cancer is something we can do together' | CNN Politics

President Joe Biden sought to deliver a unifying speech in Boston on Monday focused on his “Moonshot” initiative to reduce cancer deaths in the United States – a stop that’s part of a ramped up travel schedule highlighting his administration’s accomplishments ahead of the midterm elections.

Biden told an audience at Boston’s John F. Kennedy Library and Museum that his goal is to cut cancer death rates by at least 50% in the next 25 years. The President also said he wants to “create a more supportive experience for patients and families.”

[JPhillips]

I think Masters is the most dangerous GOP candidate with an actual chance.

An interviewer asked Arizona Republican Senate candidate Blake Masters to pick a “subversive thinker” whom people should know more about.

Masters gave it some thought and came up with a risky response for someone running for elected office.

He picked the Unabomber.

“I’ll probably get in trouble for saying this,” Masters responded. “How about, like, Theodore Kaczynski?”

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I really like this idea Joe.

Did you budget any funding for this moonshot? Seriously, a great idea. Just provide a lot of funding (if not already), otherwise it's just empty words.

Biden makes a passionate plea: 'Beating cancer is something we can do together' | CNN Politics

It is really smart. The right blindly opposes everything he does despite it being beneficial for their constituents. They gonna become the pro cancer party?