The Biden Presidency - 2020

[Edward64]

Better just to convince Bibi to give more time for hostage negotiations (and show joint resolve).

Better not to announce US forces getting involved militarily. Or setting up some sort of safe haven (ala 1983).

[GrantDawg]

He is also traveling to Jordan to meet with the King, the President of Egypt and the President of the Palestinian Authority.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[JPhillips]

Israel has a real problem with what comes next. They can bomb the shit out of Gaza, but then what? They don't want to police it or even worse incorporate it into Israel. The leadership of Hamas isn't even in Gaza, so what can they really accomplish?

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Israel has a real problem with what comes next. They can bomb the shit out of Gaza, but then what? They don't want to police it or even worse incorporate it into Israel. The leadership of Hamas isn't even in Gaza, so what can they really accomplish?

this is why my brain is broken on this issue. both sides obliterating this land. the people there unable to leave said land.

If it is completely obliterated and uninhabitable, it seems they STILL want it.....

AAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

[Brian Swartz]

Most wars aren't logical. If people followed rational, dispassionate evaluation we wouldn't live most of our lives frankly the way we do. Surrendering to the enemy, abandoning 'rightful claims', etc. are seen as worse than any possible alternative by some. And so here we are.

[RainMaker]

He is going to lose in 2024. Approval rating in the shitter and this is all he has.

We’re the most powerful nation in the history of the world. We can take care of Israel and Ukraine and still maintain our overall international defense. pic.twitter.com/j3ajSs5sG8

— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) October 16, 2023

[Edward64]

President Joe Biden will visit Israel, US Secretary of State Blinken says | CNN Politics

the US tries to strike a delicate balance of providing unwavering support for Israel’s military operations while mitigating the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and stopping the war from spreading to further fronts.

Biden will “make it clear that we want to continue to work with all our partners in the region, including Israel, to get humanitarian assistance and again to provide some sort of safe passage for civilians to get out,” National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said Monday evening.

Still seems weird Joe is going. Blinken is good enough IMO. Joe should be working with the UN to get them to send a humanitarian contingent on the ground or create a safe zone. BTW where is the UN anyway?

The US president will also travel to Jordan, where he will meet with King Abdullah II, President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt, and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. The top US diplomat in recent days met separately with the three leaders – all of whom have condemned the situation in Gaza.

I can see some value in Egypt. I'm guessing we've agreed to some terms for Egypt to open the border. Jordan has a large Palestinian population, doesn't share any borders with Gaza so unsure why other than symbolism ... and I'm surprised Jordan and Abbas want Joe to show up to talk to them right now as I'd think their population will react negatively.

In weighing Netanyahu’s invitation with his team, Biden factored in both the symbolism of a visit and its practicalities. Aside from a high-profile show of support for Israel, the trip will send a warning to other players in the region, namely Iran and its Hezbollah proxy in Lebanon, about becoming further engaged in the conflict.

But it will also link Biden more closely with the Israeli response in Gaza, including concerns over a mounting humanitarian crisis, and could act as a tacit endorsement of Netanyahu’s decisions.

Having 2 carrier groups should be proof enough of support and warning. If that doesn't do it, seriously doubt that Joe showing up himself will do much more.

Bottom line. Joe going seems weird to me. What he wants can be accomplished through Blinken, through our show of force or some public announcement that we'll do X, Y, Z and give A, B, C. I absolutely see value in Joe going after the conflict has calmed down some, but right now just seems off.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Still seems weird Joe is going.

It is a symbol. Both for Israel and for the domestic audience.

The President physically going somewhere still matters. It sends a message.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Edward64

President Joe Biden will visit Israel, US Secretary of State Blinken says | CNN Politics

Still seems weird Joe is going. Blinken is good enough IMO. Joe should be working with the UN to get them to send a humanitarian contingent on the ground or create a safe zone. BTW where is the UN anyway?

The question is good enough for what? Just sending Blinken does not reflect the commitment the U.S. has made to Israel since 1948. The President going to Israel and being seen on the ground to see and feel what is going on reflects that commitment. This is what "ironclad support" looks like. On the idea of the UN coming in now. That might be a bit more uncomfortable for everyone involved. It has been easy for most countries to support Israel after the Hamas attacks and its right to defend itself. Putting actual resources beyond that? I am not sure a lot of other countries are prepared for that sort of litmus test of support for Israel right now.

I can see some value in Egypt. I'm guessing we've agreed to some terms for Egypt to open the border. Jordan has a large Palestinian population, doesn't share any borders with Gaza so unsure why other than symbolism ... and I'm surprised Jordan and Abbas want Joe to show up to talk to them right now as I'd think their population will react negatively.

I would not be too sure about Egypt or any other country making agreements to open the border at this point. I'm not sure what the benefit is at this point for them. I am sure from the Egyptian point of view, the Palestinians have their own land and they see no reason for Egypt to help remove them from that land. Also, similar to going to Israel, I am sure Jordan wants him to see and feel the sentiments on the ground in Jordan as well.

Having 2 carrier groups should be proof enough of support and warning. If that doesn't do it, seriously doubt that Joe showing up himself will do much more.

Bottom line. Joe going seems weird to me. What he wants can be accomplished through Blinken, through our show of force or some public announcement that we'll do X, Y, Z and give A, B, C. I absolutely see value in Joe going after the conflict has calmed down some, but right now just seems off.

Except if X,Y,Z may include shooting U.S missiles from those carriers or worst, U.S. boots on the grounds even in a support role that can't come from the Secretary of State. I am not predicting or even suggesting that one of those things might happen. I am saying the President needs to be seen as being out in front of the nation's position now and in the future. What Biden should want to accomplish is to not have a Israeli ground invasion of Gaza. I think if a ground war occurs all bets are off as far as what the response will be from U.S., the Arab nations and the world in general.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

It is a symbol. Both for Israel and for the domestic audience.

The President physically going somewhere still matters. It sends a message.

I'm not getting the weird thing either. The Sec. of State usually goes and sets up things for the President to come in and finalize. It is giving the official stamp on how serious the US is taking things. I was more surprised on how early he is going than whether he would go.

[GrantDawg]

We're number 1! We're number 1!
https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/geo...source=twitter

[miked]

Shocked to see all the red states at the bottom...shocked!!

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by miked

Shocked to see all the red states at the bottom...shocked!!

Texas and Idaho are probably pissed they missed out on the shitty healthcare playoff.

[Edward64]

Politico did not break it down, not sure if a breakdown is even available right now. But sure, $100B for Ukraine, Israel, border funding, disaster aid etc. is probably worth it ... but do want to see the breakdown and how it'll be paid for.

Biden expected to ask Congress for $100B package that includes aid to Israel and Ukraine - POLITICO

The Biden administration is expected to ask Congress for at least $100 billion in supplemental funding to address Israel, Ukraine and domestic issues, such as border funding and disaster aid, according to several people granted anonymity to discuss private deliberations.

The funding levels — which would cover an entire year — have not yet been finalized and could change, according to the people involved. The request is expected to be sent to Congress Hill as soon as Friday, after President Joe Biden returns from a trip to Israel.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Politico did not break it down, not sure if a breakdown is even available right now. But sure, $100B for Ukraine, Israel, border funding, disaster aid etc. is probably worth it ... but do want to see the breakdown and how it'll be paid for.

He's going to bring it up in tonight's speech. I like the addition of Taiwan.

It's understandable that he does not have the specific breakdowns right now (e.g. Congress is not in session). But I'd like to know how this will be paid for. I assume it's net new to our debt/deficit but hope it comes out of something else.

Biden Oval Office speech: President plans to push for Israel and Ukraine aid in primetime remarks | CNN Politics

The primetime address will take place on the eve of the White House requesting north of $100 billion from Congress to deliver aid and resources to Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and the US border with Mexico.

[bob]

Originally Posted by Edward64

how this will be paid for.

ha

[Edward64]

Good speech Joe. Make up person did a good job.

Nice focus on Ukraine & Israel. And making a distinction between Hamas & Palestinians. Rejecting antisemitism, islamophobia; "we're all Americans"; "not to be blinded by rage"; "I refuse to let that happen" ... lots of good words & phrases.

One thing for sure, there's no making nice with Putin now.

[CrimsonFox]

I wish someone would send an aid package to me. JUST me.
No one else.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by bob

ha

I'm sure they'll find some cuts in Medicaid, food stamps, and maybe infrastructure projects. There are more important issues like pissing away $100 billion for nothing in return.

[CrimsonFox]

what's the over/under on how many of the 20 trucks actually make it thru gaza without esploding?

[CrimsonFox]

How do ramen noodles and water cost 100B?

[Edward64]

Here's the breakdown of the $105B ...

He’s expected to ask for $105 billion on Friday, including $60 billion for Ukraine, much of which would replenish U.S. weapons stockpiles provided earlier.

There’s also $14 billion for Israel, $10 billion for unspecified humanitarian efforts, $14 billion for managing the U.S.-Mexico border and fighting fentanyl trafficking and $7 billion for the Indo-Pacific region, which includes Taiwan.

From an Oct 1 article

How much aid the U.S. has sent to Ukraine, in 6 charts | PBS NewsHour

Since the war began, the Biden administration and the U.S. Congress have directed more than $75 billion in assistance to Ukraine, which includes humanitarian, financial, and military support

I've seen other numbers for our support life-to-date. I'm not good enough to reconcile them, suspect different components and ways of counting.

But right now $75B + $60B = $135B.


For comparison purposes, Joe's student debt forgiveness plan (new one, not the old rejected one). TBH I thought the new plan was going to be < $50B or something, I'm not sure why it's jacked up to $475B and more than the original rejected plan.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/19/b...repayment.html

President Biden’s new repayment plan for federal student loans will cost the government $475 billion over the next decade, according to a new economic projection. The updated income-driven repayment plan would surpass the $400 billion cost of the debt forgiveness plan that the Supreme Court rejected last month.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I'm sure they'll find some cuts in Medicaid, food stamps, and maybe infrastructure projects. There are more important issues like pissing away $100 billion for nothing in return.

Hey now, a good chunk of that money is corporate welfare. Defense contractors have to eat too, you know.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

He will serve some time in a military prison, or more likely a military hospital.

I'm betting military prison.

Travis King, Army private who fled to North Korea, charged with desertion | CNN Politics

Travis King, the US Army private who fled to North Korea in July, has been charged by the Army with desertion, among other crimes, according to a charging document seen by CNN Thursday.

King, who was released from North Korean custody and returned to the United States last month, was charged with a series of other alleged offenses, including possession of child pornography, assaulting fellow soldiers, and disobeying a superior officer, according to the document. He was charged with eight counts total.

Yup, good mom. Can't help but feel bad for her in this situation.

In a statement shared with CNN, King’s mother, Claudine Gates, said she loves her son “unconditionally” and is “extremely concerned about his mental health.”

“As his mother, I ask that my son be afforded the presumption of innocence,” she said.

“A mother knows her son, and I believe something happened to mine while he was deployed. The Army promised to investigate what happened at Camp Humphries, and I await the results,” Gates added.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Hey now, a good chunk of that money is corporate welfare. Defense contractors have to eat too, you know.

That's all this is. That money is not going to help anyone here at all besides them.

[GrantDawg]

We have talked about Jeff Jackson on here before, the congressman from North Carolina who probably uses TikTok better than any other politician. He does discussions about what is going on in Congress from an insider's point of view. Unfortunately, his district just got gerrymandered out of existence in the new map. Instead of trying to win a 60% Republican district where he now finds himself, he is instead running for NC Attorney General. It sucks to lose him from Congress, but I hope he wins that state election.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

We have talked about Jeff Jackson on here before, the congressman from North Carolina who probably uses TikTok better than any other politician. He does discussions about what is going on in Congress from an insider's point of view. Unfortunately, his district just got gerrymandered out of existence in the new map. Instead of trying to win a 60% Republican district where he now finds himself, he is instead running for NC Attorney General. It sucks to lose him from Congress, but I hope he wins that state election.

If the Dems were smart, they'd give him a position in the DNC or something where he could make videos and reach out to younger voters. They won't because he's a threat to them, but it'd be smart.

[Edward64]

Johnson's interview with Hannity.

Mike Johnson on Hannity: 12 key lines from the new House speaker's interview - POLITICO

7. Biden impeachment

“If, in fact, all the evidence leads to where we believe it will, that’s very likely impeachable offenses.”

9. Motion to vacate

“I think we’re going to change it.”

10. Stopgap budget measure

“We’re working through this with the ideas and trying to ensure that if another stopgap measure is required, that we do it with certain conditions.”

He seems to support Ukraine & Israel.

[Edward64]

The fun is not over yet Boyz.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67224353

George Santos faces House expulsion vote next week

Embattled Republican Rep George Santos faces expulsion from the US House of Representatives next week in a vote called by members of his own party.

Congressman Anthony D'Esposito took to the House floor on Thursday to formally demand the vote of expulsion and read the resolution.

It comes after prosecutors filed 23 charges against Mr Santos earlier this month - including identity theft.

Mr Santos denies the charges and has insisted he will not resign.

He should be expelled but then politics will get in the way.

Republicans hold the US House of Representatives with an extremely slim majority, meaning they need every vote on their roster in order to pass agenda items. If Mr Santos is expelled, they will lose one more.

The party has already passed on one opportunity to oust him from Congress.

[flere-imsaho]

Santos (if that is indeed his real name) has managed to do something I had not thought possible, specifically "be a GOP politician who has crimed too much even for today's GOP".

[Ghost Econ]

He hasn't managed it yet.

[JPhillips]

If expulsion requires 2/3 there's no chance that will happen. The new speaker already has made it clear the GOP margin is slim and we have to let the legal process play out.

[RainMaker]

Whether he could have stopped it or not, I think the "war" in the Middle East is going to cook Biden. His approval rating is cratering and it's especially true with young people.

Just a moment...

Trunp is going to cynically play this as "this wouldn't have happened under my Presidency" even if it likely would have. And he is going to hammer Biden for billions in handouts to Ukraine and Israel while people are struggling here. It basically puts Biden's foreign policy in the spotlight over anything else.

Now I don't think we will see a ton of Biden to Trump voters. But I do see a lot more Biden voters staying home, especially younger and Arab ones. The backlash against is there on this, even if the moderates support him. Whether Trump sees a drop-off too is another story.

Few weeks ago I would have said Biden had an 80% chance of winning. Now I'd say it's less than 50%.

[NobodyHere]

For some reason I think this headline was directed at a member of FOFC

The House G.O.P Has Its Leader. But Can He Be a Rainmaker?

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Whether he could have stopped it or not, I think the "war" in the Middle East is going to cook Biden. His approval rating is cratering and it's especially true with young people.

Just a moment...

Trunp is going to cynically play this as "this wouldn't have happened under my Presidency" even if it likely would have. And he is going to hammer Biden for billions in handouts to Ukraine and Israel while people are struggling here. It basically puts Biden's foreign policy in the spotlight over anything else.

Now I don't think we will see a ton of Biden to Trump voters. But I do see a lot more Biden voters staying home, especially younger and Arab ones. The backlash against is there on this, even if the moderates support him. Whether Trump sees a drop-off too is another story.

Few weeks ago I would have said Biden had an 80% chance of winning. Now I'd say it's less than 50%.

But it is a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. Support for Israel is overwhelming, especially among Democrats. Is only the lowest age demographic that supports Palestine. So, do you cater it the 25% and go against the 75%, the ones that includes the most reliable voters and about 99% of all donors? If he refused to support Israel he would have near 0 chance of getting reelected.

[JPhillips]

If this is largely over by the end of the year I just don't see it having much impact on the general election in 2024. Too many other things will happen by then.

[Ksyrup]

I was at a trade association meeting this past week. We brought in one of our DC lobbyists to give a federal update on issues impacting our industry. This is a pretty well-connected lobbyist from Brownstein. He's a GOPer but the firm is bipartisan.

At the reception later that night, I ended up in a group of 3-4 people talking about politics which included the lobbyist. He said the general expectation in DC is that Biden is not going to run for reelection. He said he thought the only way Trump wins is if Biden runs. That surprised the rest of us because it's just not something anyone is talking about. Someone said, well if that's going to happen, they need to move pretty quickly to get someone to replace him. He said, no just the opposite. No one wants Kamala, so this is not going to be a formal hand-off like you would expect in the traditional sense, it's going to be a coordinated effort with a short timeline to give Harris no shot and allow 2 or 3 people to jump into the race. He said it might be some story like Biden gets sick, decides to step aside in the best interests of the party/country, and allows a Whitmer/Newsom/Pritzker to fight it out.

I guess take it with a grain of salt from the DC GOP side - maybe he was just entertaining us - but it seems plausible given his age and approval ratings.

We also talked KY politics and he confirmed what we're seeing in polls that Cameron's internal polling does not look good. He said Beshear is popular and that Kentuckians tend to ignore party if they feel like a homegrown Kentuckian shows they care about the people of the state. One of his good friends in Congress is Andy Barr who happens to be my Rep, and he said Barr is really hoping Cameron wins because Barr has his sights on McConnell's seat and wants Cameron to already have a job when McConnell steps aside. Pretty interesting.

[Edward64]

re: Biden & Kamala.

Was your lobbyist implying like Biden knows he's not going to run and therefore consciously trying to short changed Kamala at the right time?

Or that Biden genuinely does want to run for re-election but sooner or later he'll realize he should drop out?

[GrantDawg]

That sounds like GOP fever dream crap.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Edward64

re: Biden & Kamala.

Was your lobbyist implying like Biden knows he's not going to run and therefore consciously trying to short changed Kamala at the right time?

Or that Biden genuinely does want to run for re-election but sooner or later he'll realize he should drop out?

The former.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

That sounds like GOP fever dream crap.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Certainly possible. But there's nothing I see from polling that suggests Biden is doing well so...

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Certainly possible. But there's nothing I see from polling that suggests Biden is doing well so...

To be fair, almost all incumbents look bad at this point of the election. Obama, Clinton, Bush all were at there lowest points the year before reelection. But attempting to cut out the people in the selection process would doom whoever the Democrats put up. If Biden did like straight up die or become incapacitated that might make it work, but then if it is not Kamala it is going to further divide the party. "If a black woman is not good enough to be President, then why was she choosen to be Vice President?" "You are replacing a black Vice President with a white man?"
Biden won the nomination by winning over black voters. What are those black voters going to feel like if you replace the Black female Vice President with Gavin Newsome without a primary?

[GrantDawg]

Dola: Just to add if Biden drops out after some or all the primaries have taken place, then it is likely the next highest delegate count is going to belong to Dean Phillips. I don't see the party being happy with the nominee being Harlan Crow's favorite Democrat.

[flere-imsaho]

This:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

That sounds like GOP fever dream crap.

And this:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

To be fair, almost all incumbents look bad at this point of the election. Obama, Clinton, Bush all were at there lowest points the year before reelection.

Now, if it was a Democratic lobbyist, more likely to have some inside sources, I'd give it a little bit of thought but right now it sounds more likely something a bored DC pundit class thought up.

[Ksyrup]

Maybe. As someone who supported Biden and obviously would vote for him again, I still think he ought to step aside. He's just too old, period. I think he'll have a hard time fighting the narrative of the economy, border and foreign affairs under his presidency regardless of the facts. And having to pull Harris along as VP again because *tradition* and *A-A woman* makes his situation even worse because she's underperforming the low expectations for a VP.

I don't know why Harris wouldn't have to prove herself if Biden stepped aside. She got like 1% of Dems during the 2020 primaries and she's done nothing to show she's presidential material as VP. Why wouldn't others have a fair shot? He can step aside without having to endorse anyone.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Now, if it was a Democratic lobbyist, more likely to have some inside sources, I'd give it a little bit of thought but right now it sounds more likely something a bored DC pundit class thought up.

His firm is bipartisan so they have all the sources covered. Now, it's a fair point whether as a GOPer he is just running out his own version of what he thinks or wants to happen, but I have no doubt his firm knows pretty much everything going on on both sides of the aisle.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Maybe. As someone who supported Biden and obviously would vote for him again, I still think he ought to step aside. He's just too old, period. I think he'll have a hard time fighting the narrative of the economy, border and foreign affairs under his presidency regardless of the facts. And having to pull Harris along as VP again because *tradition* and *A-A woman* makes his situation even worse because she's underperforming the low expectations for a VP.

I don't know why Harris wouldn't have to prove herself if Biden stepped aside. She got like 1% of Dems during the 2020 primaries and she's done nothing to show she's presidential material as VP. Why wouldn't others have a fair shot? He can step aside without having to endorse anyone.

The deadline for primaries is disappearing. I think the New Hampshire primary deadline is this week. If Biden drops out in a couple of months, there is no way anyone can "prove" themselves because the primary deadlines will be long past. That leaves the party elders just picking a candidate, which is what I was referring to. That would be death to the Democrats.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

But it is a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. Support for Israel is overwhelming, especially among Democrats. Is only the lowest age demographic that supports Palestine. So, do you cater it the 25% and go against the 75%, the ones that includes the most reliable voters and about 99% of all donors? If he refused to support Israel he would have near 0 chance of getting reelected.

No it's not. Sympathies have shifted toward Palestinians over the years. And the party overwhelmingly supports a ceasefire (heck even Republicans want it). Biden's position is in the extreme minority of the party.

This is a new era and they're treating it like 20 years ago. Young people can pull up videos of dead babies being pulled out of rubble and white phosphorous being dropped on residential neighborhoods. They can read about why Gaza is considered an open air prison. The media can't be the gatekeeper anymore about this stuff. It's why you're seeing a push by Israel to shutoff all communications in Gaza and murder journalists reporting on it.

No one really knows how this plays out, but I don't remember a time where there was this much blowback regarding Israel's atrocities. I think Biden is going to lose a lot of important demographics and we knew his margins were already very tight.

[RainMaker]

I don't buy that there is some grand plan to have Biden step aside. They've mostly neutered all the big names who could run a successful Presidential campaign like Pritzker and Gretchen. They've made no effort to build up someone like Mark Kelly who would be tough to beat (especially if foreign policy becomes an issue).

They're all in on Biden for better or worse.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

No it's not. Sympathies have shifted toward Palestinians over the years. And the party overwhelmingly supports a ceasefire (heck even Republicans want it). Biden's position is in the extreme minority of the party.

This is a new era and they're treating it like 20 years ago. Young people can pull up videos of dead babies being pulled out of rubble and white phosphorous being dropped on residential neighborhoods. They can read about why Gaza is considered an open air prison. The media can't be the gatekeeper anymore about this stuff. It's why you're seeing a push by Israel to shutoff all communications in Gaza and murder journalists reporting on it.

No one really knows how this plays out, but I don't remember a time where there was this much blowback regarding Israel's atrocities. I think Biden is going to lose a lot of important demographics and we knew his margins were already very tight.

"Narrowing" shows Palestinian support at it is "highest" and it is still 23% in favor of Israel and with only 31% in favor of Palestinians. Ignoring the 54% in favor of the 31% is not exactly great political strategy.