The Biden Presidency - 2020

[Lathum]

Oh look! Another thread about to be trashed by Edward!

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Please just remove your reply and quote so I don’t have to start a months long back and forth of obfuscation and become victim of energy vampiring.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'll take this as you couldn't find the quote.

No problem. Everyone makes mistakes once in a while.

(But if you ever do find the quote, we can always take it to the other thread and not bother everyone)

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Oh look! Another thread about to be trashed by Edward!

Just responding to a question directed at me. But apparently just a simple mistake. np

[Ksyrup]

I don't know what this means/whether it will translate on Election Day, but this thread is pretty interesting - although it does come from a Dem source, presumably with accurate info (?).

The unprecedented GOP campaign to game/corrupt the polling averages continues. Here's how many different GOP pollsters have dropped +3/+4 R polls in each state in recent days:

AZ 10
GA 9
PA 8
NV 6
WA 6
NH 5
NC 4
OH 3 (but Cygnal has done 5 alone!)https://t.co/V2fRqhPNd0

— Simon Rosenberg (@SimonWDC) November 3, 2022

The upshot being that Republicans are concentrating on paying pollsters to drop R-leaning poll after poll to skew the averages to appear like a red wave is coming with momentum, when the reality of early voting is that Dems are outdoing their 2020 performance. Whether that continues or election day momentum swings enough to the Rs... we'll see. But this has me hopeful.

I guess my question is how accurate are the D/R early voting numbers.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I guess my question is how accurate are the D/R early voting numbers.

They babble quite a bit but 538 says below on early voting.

The Case For A Democratic Surprise On Election Night | FiveThirtyEight

Bleu: So if we can’t trust the polls, maybe we should look at early voting data instead —

Silver: Oh, no no no no no. Let me stop you right there. It’s a trap. There are rarely reliable benchmarks to use, and the analysis inevitably reflects people’s partisan priors. About the only person I trust to any degree at all on early voting is Jon Ralston in Nevada, and he thinks the numbers there look pretty bad for Democrats.

On his polling methodology ...

Silver: I’m not so sure that’s true, at least for FiveThirtyEight. Our model has a house-effects adjustment, so if a pollster consistently shows overly rosy results for Republicans — or for Democrats, for that matter — it takes that into account. And besides, to your point about incentives, it’s a free market. If there’s a firm with a turnout model that shows great results for Democrats, they can publish those numbers if they have confidence in them.

Bleu: Have you agreed with a single thing I’ve had to say, Nate? I could once count on you to defy conventional wisdom. Now you sound just like everybody else. What do you really think?

Silver: My least favorite question! I don’t have some private set of beliefs that I keep to myself! I trust our forecast, which is based on a computer program I wrote four years ago and not my mood as I’m sitting here with a glass of pinot! Our forecast says that the Senate is a toss-up at best for Democrats, and the momentum has been with Republicans. But I’m not sure what we’re really arguing about. I agree that the special elections were good for Democrats. And I very much agree that Democrats could beat their polls. It’s an entirely realistic scenario. But it’s not the likeliest scenario. Besides, the president’s party doing poorly in the midterms would be about the most normal thing imaginable, especially with inflation at 8 percent.

Beats me. My guess is the Republicans do have momentum and better than 50-50 that they will get both chambers.

[miked]

I would imagine R vote turnout will be heavier on election day since the Rs have spend the last 6 years talking about how early voting and non-election day voting is a fraud.

[sterlingice]

Unfortunately, I think a lot of that matters relative to what they have done in the past as I think the GOP holds a pretty big voting day advantage.

Just to give an example, Jon Ralston was an amazing read throughout the 2020 election cycle and here's his in-depth take on how the Nevada numbers look right now:
The early voting blog, 2022 – The Nevada Independent

I think there's some credence to the GOP pollsters giving themselves a bump or maybe just not factoring things in that they know are relevant (polls getting noisier and getting more red because younger people don't answer their phones type stuff). But I just don't know. The CW has been "early voting numbers don't matter" for a while now but wisdom keeps being anything but conventional the last few election cycles and if the Dems do keep the Senate, for instance, that will be one of the narratives. If they keep the House, then it'll most likely be lost to the political violence story that follows. Both parties seem to act like the close races we expect are the close races with major surrogates going to the places you'd think like Pennsylvania. It seems a little odd that Trump is going to Florida and Ohio, two places solidly red, but Trump is going to go where Trump wants to go, not where the party wants him to go.

SI

[Lathum]

The only reason I could see the Rs cooking the books with the polls is so they can claim fraud. I just don't see it. I think Dobbs peaked too early and a lot of suburban women in places like PA, GA, Ohio, etc...are pissed their grocery bill is $35 higher each week.

[sterlingice]

That's my expectation, unfortunately

SI

[Ksyrup]

Probably. I did see some analysis that Nevada looks bad. Early voting is essentially tied and you have to expect an R advantage on election day. So that's one state that is likely going red.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Probably. I did see some analysis that Nevada looks bad. Early voting is essentially tied and you have to expect an R advantage on election day. So that's one state that is likely going red.

This article claims that Dems lead NV early voting by more than they did in 2018, when they won.

Nevada early voting shows Democrats hold lead over GOP in Clark, Washoe counties | Las Vegas Review-Journal

[PilotMan]

He nails it

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

He nails it

He nails a lot of things.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

This article claims that Dems lead NV early voting by more than they did in 2018, when they won.

Nevada early voting shows Democrats hold lead over GOP in Clark, Washoe counties | Las Vegas Review-Journal

Hmm. I read some twitter thread that showed Dems lead in Clark was less than 1000 votes and that's not good when you factor in what to come on Tuesday. I believe they were looking at 2020 comps, not 2018.

[miami_fan]

Homeland Security Admits It Tried to Manufacture Fake Terrorists for Trump

Sounds like the taxpayer got good value for the money spent to create those narratives in Portland.

[Ksyrup]

They're only saying that now because it's the Biden administration and it's the mid-term elections!

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Homeland Security Admits It Tried to Manufacture Fake Terrorists for Trump

Sounds like the taxpayer got good value for the money spent to create those narratives in Portland.

Remember when we lived in a world where things like that mattered?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Remember when we lived in a world where things like that mattered?

Actually, I'm not sure when. Reagan's Iran-Contra? Possibly Clinton's impeachment (when impeachment still meant something)?

[Edward64]

McCarthy's plans if/when he becomes speaker.

Devil's in the details (and the execution of the policies).

Kevin McCarthy outlines Republicans' agenda days before midterms | CNN Politics

In an exclusive, wide-ranging interview with CNN, two days before the midterm elections, McCarthy outlined his plans for power, which includes tackling inflation, rising crime and border security – three issues that have become central to Republicans’ closing pitch to voters.

I like getting control of the border but do see "fix the broken immigration system" is a key component and so should be acted on at the same time (vs later). Can't be much worse than the not much effort from Kamala.

“The first thing you’ll see is a bill to control the border first,” McCarthy told CNN, when asked for specifics about his party’s immigration plans. “You’ve got to get control over the border. You’ve had almost 2 million people just this year alone coming across.”
:
said Republicans would not put a bill on the floor to fix the broken immigration system until the border is secure.

“I think ‘Stay in Mexico’ you have to have right off the bat,” he said, referring to the controversial policy where migrants were forced to remain in Mexico while they wait for their immigration proceedings in the United States.

Yes, there should be an investigation on the pull-out. Not if there was a need to pull-out, but how it happened. Did anyone lose their jobs over it?

I doubt anything new will come out of additional investigations on the Covid outbreak. Good for political theatre vs China so sure, go for it.

I don't get the third item of "admin has dealt with parents and school board meetings". Whatever that is, doubt it rises to the level of a congressional investigation.

But McCarthy also highlighted oversight and investigations as a key priority for a GOP-led House, listing potential probes into the chaotic Afghanistan pullout, the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic and how the administration has dealt with parents and school board meetings.

Accountability is good. For now, I doubt he has much leverage in reducing our support to Ukraine (and hopefully the lame duck congress will vote a nice farewell package). If there is a drawn out stalemate, I can see him using this to "encourage" negotiations.

And with the MAGA-wing calling to cut off funding to Ukraine while the GOP’s defense hawks vow not to abandon the country amid its war with Russia, McCarthy attempted to reaffirm his support for Ukraine while saying they would not automatically rubber stamp any additional requests for aid.

“I’m very supportive of Ukraine,” McCarthy said. “I think there has to be accountability going forward. … You always need, not a blank check, but make sure the resources are going to where it is needed. And make sure Congress, and the Senate, have the ability to debate it openly.”

Haven't read much about this possibility but I can see it as political revenge and buildup to 2024.

And he left the door open to launching eventual impeachment proceedings, which some of his members have already begun to call for.

Sounds good to me but need to know the details.

When pressed for specific on his plans to fight crime, McCarthy said Republicans would fund the police, provide grants for recruiting and training, and look at how crimes are being prosecuted.

Another sounds good to me but need to know the details. But it is more than just gas prices.

And to bring down inflation and gas prices, he said they would reduce government spending and make America more energy independent, though he did not name specific bills.

Obviously, political hypocrisy here. Par for the course. Will we ever get the hero(es) we need to reduce the national debt-to-GDP ratio? Probably not.

“If you’re going to give a person a higher limit, wouldn’t you first say you should change your behavior, so you just don’t keep raising and all the time?” he said. “You shouldn’t just say, ‘Oh, I’m gonna let you keep spending money.’ No household should do that.”

McCarthy acknowledged Republicans were willing to raise the debt ceiling under Trump, but said the calculus is different now because Democrats spent trillions of dollars under Biden.

Below is likely true.

Most bills will be primarily messaging endeavors, unlikely to overcome the president’s veto or the Senate’s 60-vote threshold,

[miked]

I'm sure the first order will be a bill to prosecute Hunter Biden and investigate the DOJ. The same one that they were weaponizing to try and win elections. The second one will be an impeachment hearing because Biden tripped over a wire and therefore has dementia.

[Flasch186]

We can't go by anything but the exact text of the bill so I'm not sure why you added his quotes and such. You have already set your precedent that we only can go by the actual context of the bills themselves. SMH

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

We can't go by anything but the exact text of the bill so I'm not sure why you added his quotes and such. You have already set your precedent that we only can go by the actual context of the bills themselves. SMH

I have said (paraphrased) "go with what was written in the bill" like what was written in the "Don't Say Gay" bill that was passed.

However, in this case, there is no "bill" that has been passed? So not tracking on why I can't quote a CNN article?

[PilotMan]

Jill Biden's a WITCH!!

Ex-MLB star Lenny Dykstra pins Phillies' World Series struggles on Jill Biden's appearance | Fox News

"Better luck next time, #Phillies. Might be better off rolling out that red carpet for Lenny Dykstra instead of Dr. Jill Biden. (9 hits in 3 games since she showed up.)" Dykstra wrote.

[JPhillips]

How does the US Congress pass a bill requiring Mexico to allow immigrants to stay in their country until the US is ready to adjudicate their cases?

[PilotMan]

Easy, just go back to a solution someone on this board advocated, tell them you'll execute them at the border if they cross. Plain and simple. No questions, no age or gender limits. Just straight executions at will. That will teach them who's boss.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

How does the US Congress pass a bill requiring Mexico to allow immigrants to stay in their country until the US is ready to adjudicate their cases?

By threatening them with border patrol violence and taking away their kids so they make the "correct decision" to remain in Mexico? Can't make an omelet without committing a few humans rights violations. You know, the Stephen Miller plan - he did not zee this as a problem, more of a feature than a bug.

SI

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Actually, I'm not sure when. Reagan's Iran-Contra? Possibly Clinton's impeachment (when impeachment still meant something)?

Al Franken's picture? Little things used to matter never mind things like manufacturing fake terrorists.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Al Franken's picture? Little things used to matter never mind things like manufacturing fake terrorists.

In retrospect, a sincere apology and public slap-down should have been good enough. That only happened in 2018 (thought it was further back). I think the "when it mattered" was further back.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

By threatening them with border patrol violence and taking away their kids so they make the "correct decision" to remain in Mexico? Can't make an omelet without committing a few humans rights violations. You know, the Stephen Miller plan - he did not zee this as a problem, more of a feature than a bug.

SI

I know how this might work for the immigrants, but if Mexico says, nah, fuck that, how does a GOP Congress write legislation that makes them?

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

You know, the Stephen Miller plan - he did not zee this as a problem, more of a feature than a bug.

SI

Well done sir.

[Lathum]

If anyone thinks the GOP strategy the next two years will be anything other than BS hearings and revenge politics I’ve got a bridge to sell them. Get ready for MTG to be front and center yelling about Fauci and Hunter for the next two years. Their supporters will love it because governance has become a sport for them where the goal is to own the libs. Nothing else matters.

Also GTFO with Afghanistan. That was always going to be messy and if anything it’s on trump and pompeo for negotiating with the taliban and leaving the incoming administration in a terrible spot. .

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Also GTFO with Afghanistan. That was always going to be messy and if anything it’s on trump and pompeo for negotiating with the taliban and leaving the incoming administration in a terrible spot. .

There is no doubt Trump set the stage and somewhat force Biden's hand to withdraw.

But are you also saying Trump & his admin are the primary cause of the messy withdrawal e.g. Jun-Jul-Aug 2021?

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Edward64

There is no doubt Trump set the stage and somewhat force Biden's hand to withdraw.

But are you also saying Trump & his admin are the primary cause of the messy withdrawal e.g. Jun-Jul-Aug 2021?

Absolutely. Trump forced his hand not only with the timing, but by not working at all with the incoming administration on coordinating and possibly outright sabotaging the new admin.

It was always going to be messy. Do you think it would have been better under trump? What could Biden have done significantly differently?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Absolutely. Trump forced his hand not only with the timing, but by not working at all with the incoming administration on coordinating and possibly outright sabotaging the new admin.

It was always going to be messy. Do you think it would have been better under trump? What could Biden have done significantly differently?

Disagree on timing. Trump said May. Biden pushed it to Sep. Biden could have continued to push it if he wanted to.

I don't know if the withdrawal would have been better under Trump. It could have been worse (e.g. more US deaths) but it could have been better also. If the question was could Biden have negotiated a better withdrawal agreement in Doha 2020, probably yes.

An article that discusses the withdrawal including what could have been done differently. Plenty of blame to go around but Trump & admin is not the major culprit in the actual withdrawal. I think the quote below sums it up for me.

A year on, everybody is responsible for the Afghanistan withdrawal tragedy - Vox

And Trump, who signed the Doha Agreement in 2020 with the Taliban that committed to withdrawing US troops by May 2021, laid few plans to follow through on it.

But Biden’s team had eight months in office to plot a responsible drawdown. (In April 2021, Biden said the US wouldn’t meet the May deadline, but committed to having all troops out by September 11.)

[Lathum]

If Biden pushed the deadline a second time that would have shown bad faith and possibly lead to tensions with the Taliban. You are never leaving a country after 20 years of military occupation cleanly, especially when the prior administration set you up for failure.

[Ryche]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Disagree on timing. Trump said May. Biden pushed it to Sep. Biden could have continued to push it if he wanted to.

I don't know if the withdrawal would have been better under Trump. It could have been worse (e.g. more US deaths) but it could have been better also. If the question was could Biden have negotiated a better withdrawal agreement in Doha 2020, probably yes.

An article that discusses the withdrawal including what could have been done differently. Plenty of blame to go around but Trump & admin is not the major culprit in the actual withdrawal. I think the quote below sums it up for me.

A year on, everybody is responsible for the Afghanistan withdrawal tragedy - Vox

Judging by the way he pulled out of northern Syria, abandoning our Kurdish allies to Turkey and all the ISIS prisoners they were detaining, I don't see any likelihood Afghanistan would have been handled better.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Ryche

Judging by the way he pulled out of northern Syria, abandoning our Kurdish allies to Turkey and all the ISIS prisoners they were detaining, I don't see any likelihood Afghanistan would have been handled better.

It was a poison pill left for Biden, plain and simple. Likely orchestrated by Pompeo, Trump is too stupid to set that up. To even meet with the Taliban and legitimize them on the world scale should have been an impeachable offense.

[GrantDawg]

And he wanted to bring them to Camp David on September 11th.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

And he wanted to bring them to Camp David on September 11th.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

yeah, but Biden fell off his bike that one time...

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

You think the price you're paying right now is gouging? Really? What happens when the US is totally cut off from any and all ME oil supply? You think the Chinese don't have an interest in that?

What happens when they start imprisoning US citizens and kidnapping their children? Maybe Biden can watch the Prince fuck his wife too. This relationship seems to be great for both sides.

New: U.S. citizen Carly Morris was detained by authorities in Saudi Arabia yesterday, @thefreedomi says. Her eight-year-old daughter’s whereabouts remain unknown. https://t.co/W1LFFh5IVY

— Elizabeth Hagedorn (@ElizHagedorn) November 8, 2022

[PilotMan]

What are talking about? Entire US policy is now based on one part of a story that's totally unrelated to anything?

[GrantDawg]

Just putting this here to open discussion. After last night, what are your thoughts?

We may have to put aside ‘Dems don’t have a deep bench if Biden doesn’t run in 2024’ conventional wisdom after tonight.

Shapiro
Whitmer
Newsom
Fetterman

And if he wins, Warnock.

Not a good night for Harris or Buttigieg stans. Much better & more tested alternatives out there.

— Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) November 9, 2022

[GrantDawg]

My thoughts? Whitmer and Newsom are interesting choices. Fetterman and Shapiro ran great campaign and possibly have a strong future, but they would have to basically turn around and start running right now. I don't see that happening. Warnock maybe most intriguing. I would say that commercial of his ex-wife claiming he ran over her foot is not going to play well on a National stage.

[sterlingice]

I don't think any of those names are ready for a prime time Presidential run in 2024. Maybe Newsom, but ideally these are some names for 2028 or beyond. And I'm not sure how many of those names really have national potential.

SI

[Lathum]

I think Mayor Pete is still the future star of the party. Newsome is the only one on that list I can see getting traction.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I think Mayor Pete is still the future star of the party. Newsome is the only one on that list I can see getting traction.

Mayor Pete needs to win an election other than mayor for the 4th largest city in Indiana.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I don't think any of those names are ready for a prime time Presidential run in 2024. Maybe Newsom, but ideally these are some names for 2028 or beyond. And I'm not sure how many of those names really have national potential.

SI

How do you come to that conclusion? Newsom is the Governor of the biggest state in the country (basically a country in itself), and is prominent on the National stage. Whitmer is entering a second term as a Governor of a large mid-western state and just oversaw the flipping of her House and Senate to the Dems. If that doesn't prepare you for a National stage, what in the heck does? They both have way more a resume than Obama did before he became President.

[PilotMan]

Newsome has specifically said he won't run. Take a politician at their word, I know, but he still said it.

[Kodos]

I'd like to see Jon Stewart throw his hat in the ring.

[PilotMan]

I agree. I think the left needs someone who can actually give it back with passion and facts. It comes down to someone with camera time. As much crap as Zeliniski(sp) took for being an actor and comedian, but that's exactly who the left needs to be putting up. I know Franken is just now hitting the circuit with his book, but someone like him could really connect.