The Biden Presidency - 2020

[Brian Swartz]

I have to agree with that. I have a relative who is totally convinced that if Buttigieg had won the nomination he would have easily dispatched Trump. While that is totally unknowable, the idea of earning your way up the contemporary version of the cursus honorum has merit.

[JPhillips]

The party doesn't care much about anything but the WH, so naturally, that's where the candidates are going.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I'd rather see positions go to people who took on tough fights like Abrams, Beto, Ossof, etc.

The problem is none of those folks actually win their big races. That group has been 0-3 (and I fear 0-4 by January).

I do think Beto is getting a slot somewhere though. I mean what else does he have going on.

I'd like to see Abrams get something bigger (DNC Chair ideally) but does she want to leave Fair Fight?

[Brian Swartz]

I still think that's better that not having actually been in a big race to begin with.

[ISiddiqui]

A lot of it depends on what you are hoping to achieve. Like Buttigieg may make a whole lot of sense as UN Ambassador. Whereas Ossoff may not make any sense in a Cabinet position.

[stevew]

Toilet paper is vanishing again.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

The problem is none of those folks actually win their big races. That group has been 0-3 (and I fear 0-4 by January).

I do think Beto is getting a slot somewhere though. I mean what else does he have going on.

I'd like to see Abrams get something bigger (DNC Chair ideally) but does she want to leave Fair Fight?

Those were uphill battles that they almost won. The fact they were willing to actually take that fight says a lot about them and the party should reward them for it.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Those were uphill battles that they almost won. The fact they were willing to actually take that fight says a lot about them and the party should reward them for it.

How? I don't know what Cabinet slots they are qualified for or what positions they may be ok in (if anything look at Abrams who has carved out her own position in the state she knows the best). Not to mention that both Beto and Ossoff are very moderate and likely wouldn't go over well with a lot of progressives.

Would creating DNC directors for certain areas be considered enough of a 'reward'?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

How? I don't know what Cabinet slots they are qualified for or what positions they may be ok in (if anything look at Abrams who has carved out her own position in the state she knows the best). Not to mention that both Beto and Ossoff are very moderate and likely wouldn't go over well with a lot of progressives.

Would creating DNC directors for certain areas be considered enough of a 'reward'?

What has Mayor Pete done? He was a corporate candidate funded almost exclusively from large corporations, special interests, and lobbying groups. His business background is working for a repulsive consulting firm where he helped spearhead massive layoffs in Michigan to help an insurance company turn some more profit.

Like I get some people bought him a few delegates. But he is an empty suit who stands for nothing.

Yeah Beto lost, but he was willing to jump in the fight. And afterward he put in the effort to increase voter turnout by Democrats in the state. And he's been one of the most outspoken gun control advocates on the left. Sure he's moderate on a lot of issue, but the guy actually put his ass on the line and should be rewarded.

[RainMaker]

Basically people like Pete are extensions of dipshits like Pelosi who stand for nothing but helping their rich donors. If the party wants to make any ground up with working class people, they should be focusing more on activists and those who put in the leg work.

[ISiddiqui]

So, once again, what positions are Beto and Ossoff qualified for? Waving your arms and saying they should get something isn't a plan.

[RainMaker]

By coincidence: exactly 6 years ago today, as Vice President of the USA, Joe Biden sent this note to his staff.

I presume in the background, thoughts of his first wife & daughter who died long ago; or his son, who died of cancer just a few months after this note.

Worth reading. pic.twitter.com/UwBbJ8A73i

— dan barker (@danbarker) November 7, 2020

[Ksyrup]

You are of the mistaken belief that it's only Republicans who give positions not based on merit and but for things like, say, being the party's spokesman on Fox News or getting really, really close to beating a Republican in GOP territory.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

So, once again, what positions are Beto and Ossoff qualified for? Waving your arms and saying they should get something isn't a plan.

I don't know. Just saying if the party is looking to elevate some voices, I think the people who take on tough races should be rewarded first. Same thing for Abrams.

[Flasch186]

I find it the height of irony that those complaining that they will not accept shut downs and shut downs are terrible are the same ones that wouldn't just wear masks to save the economy and avoid shut downs. smh

[Ksyrup]

That's because they can have it both ways - no masks, everything stays open, and people they don't care about die.

[GrantDawg]

I really do get the sentiment. Every day is going to be "Trump Trump Trump."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/jus...s-say-n1247959

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

I really do get the sentiment. Every day is going to be "Trump Trump Trump."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/jus...s-say-n1247959

If there's a decent chance to convict, you have to do it. There needs to be moral hazard for doing the stuff he did. Then again, I'm applying normal person rules to rich people so that's probably foolish.

SI

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

If there's a decent chance to convict, you have to do it. There needs to be moral hazard for doing the stuff he did. Then again, I'm applying normal person rules to rich people so that's probably foolish.

SI

What he is stating he wants is to not get in the way of the AG from doing whatever they they need to do. He is also not going to stop New York in their investigations. What he is against is having congress or his administration being tied up with it. Let law enforcement do what they do, and have the politicians concentrate on the country. I am all for that.

[Ksyrup]

And just from an optics perspective, that's exactly what Biden needs to do. He's already got 70M+ people in this country against him, no reason to bring more along for the ride and make his job that much harder.

[JPhillips]

I get the impulse, I just think it's a little naive. There's no way the GOP is going to move on from investigations. When do the investigations begin with Graham and Johnson? March? April? The next two years are going to be full of accusations and investigations, so the choice is whether to play offense or defense.

Dems need to understand that the low information voter isn't paying enough attention to determine which investigations have merit and which don't. They see constant investigations of Dems and assume there must be some fire with all of that smoke. Dems moving on only reinforces the GOP message that Dems are corrupt and GOPers aren't.

The GOP is still working to create an apartheid state. We won't get past that by being less political.

[larrymcg421]

I mean, I think Biden should appoint people he thinks are likely to hold a firm line on past abuses, but it's absolutely the correct move to let those people operate independently. The President being involved in charging political opponents should not be a thing. I know the GOP will act differently, but this is an issue where I don't think we should fight fire with fire.

[Butter]

Prosecute with extreme prejudice.

They would've done the same to any Dems that they could've found LITERALLY ANYTHING on.

That's what blows my mind. People still chanting "lock her up" at Hillary. Why do you think they didn't? Because some old lady that the Democratic party dropped like a hot potato when she lost to Trump still wields maniacal influence in the criminal justice system? Or maybe it was because there was nothing to prosecute on.

There are literally mountains of evidence against Trump that has been withheld due to his interference in the machinations of the executive branch. If he's running in 2024, it will either be from out of the country, during ongoing litigation, or from a jail cell.

But sure, I don't think Biden should be the cheerleader, but he won't have to be.

[JPhillips]

I agree for the President, but the House should get off of the sidelines and investigate all of the corruption and malfeasance.

[Butter]

Graham should be investigated for attempting to interfere in the election results in Georgia.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I agree for the President, but the House should get off of the sidelines and investigate all of the corruption and malfeasance.

Exactly. Let others do the dirty work while Biden stays above the fray.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Exactly. Let others do the dirty work while Biden stays above the fray.

Biden needs to pick Sally Yates as his attorney general and have her show up to put the handcuffs on Trump.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

If there's a decent chance to convict, you have to do it. There needs to be moral hazard for doing the stuff he did. Then again, I'm applying normal person rules to rich people so that's probably foolish.

Agree 100%, and I'd go higher if I could. The more power someone has, the higher standard they need to be held to, not lower. The only way to stop corruption is to actually stop it and punish it where you find it.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

Agree 100%, and I'd go higher if I could. The more power someone has, the higher standard they need to be held to, not lower. The only way to stop corruption is to actually stop it and punish it where you find it.

I agree idealogically. I just think that in the practicality, those with real power will escape real trouble. Those are rules that only apply to us peasants down below.

SI

[Edward64]

I don't know much about Warnock and my guess is he does have many of the traits I would consider as "radical left". But don't really care, I really want Biden to get 2 years of control to do his thing and I'll pay more attention in 2022.

[ISiddiqui]

Loeffler is trying to make Warnock seem like another AOC, but Warnock is for expanding Medicaid and shoring up the ACA, not Medicare for All, and he's not a Green New Deal supporter. Warnock is basically on the same level of John Lewis in terms of positions.

[Radii]

apologies if I missed this somewhere, but this is a very encouraging sign to me:

hxxps://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-15/biden-fills-economic-posts-with-experts-on-systemic-racism

[Thomkal]

Yep very encouraging Radii

[Vegas Vic]

I would be in favor of filling economic positions with experts on the economy. Remember when Trump appointed Rick Perry for Secretary of Energy?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Radii

apologies if I missed this somewhere, but this is a very encouraging sign to me:

hxxps://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-15/biden-fills-economic-posts-with-experts-on-systemic-racism

Fantastic!

This plus he's making sure climate change is a priority among many Departments make me very optimistic.

[GrantDawg]

My prediction of the Biden White House:


If Democrats loose the Georgia run-offs (most likely scenario), Biden will have his hands completely tied by MCConnell. While Trump builds his media empire and starts running for President again immediately, the Republicans in the Senate will see no advantage on working with Biden on anything. They will stonewall every nomination, maybe allowing a handful of positions through if the person is moderate enough, but mostly just forcing Biden to keep temporary appointments in place. Absolutely no judges will be confirmed. Meanwhile Biden will spend most of his presidency trying to put out the fires that Trump left behind, while the Senate constantly tries to drum an investigation on every conspiracy theory they can find, counting on 2022 when the GOP will most likely take over the Congress so they can join in on the fun. Biden will be impeached by a Republican house as payback for Trump's impeachment. They will probably impeach Kamala as well.


If Democrats win the run-offs (long shot)- Joe Manchin becomes the Majority leader in every way but name. Nothing goes through congress without Joe's approval, unless it is watered down enough for Romney to agree with it. No major overhauls, no public options, maybe some pretty moderate legislation passes. All till 2022 when the Republicans take control of the house (and possibly retakes the Senate).


Sorry I am so bleak, but I see very little hope the Republicans as a whole will ever be reasonable again.

[Kodos]

Imagine how we'd all be feeling if Trump had won this election.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Kodos

Imagine how we'd all be feeling if Trump had won this election.

I'd be reading up more on Mussolini's Italy and be thinking about how well I fit in versus how much career and family damage we can take with an exit strategy and to where (not that this isn't already taking place, but more in earnest)

SI

[stevew]

If Biden dies, there’s no way the republicans will approve a VP, right? 50/50 ties are a loss from what I read.

[Flasch186]

It's just incredible the hypocrisy that they can't see. They were so all about King Obama and that he would be a dictator and here we are 4 years later and they're literally trying to figure out ways to go against the popular vote and electoral modus operandi. It just is unbelievable and even more so for me that I have people I work with that are knee-deep in the excusing of all of it. I'm just shocked more so every day. If I posted the story about the weeklong executions televised on Plan B in Michigan I'm certain that they would say that it's a lie, not true, OR not as bad as the 'looters' and anarchy that almost took over our cities a few months ago.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

It's just incredible the hypocrisy that they can't see. They were so all about King Obama and that he would be a dictator and here we are 4 years later and they're literally trying to figure out ways to go against the popular vote and electoral modus operandi. It just is unbelievable and even more so for me that I have people I work with that are knee-deep in the excusing of all of it. I'm just shocked more so every day. If I posted the story about the weeklong executions televised on Plan B in Michigan I'm certain that they would say that it's a lie, not true, OR not as bad as the 'looters' and anarchy that almost took over our cities a few months ago.

They're fascists plain and simple.

[Thomkal]

So an interesting name came up for Biden's list of potential Attorney Generals: Judge Merrick Garland. Man wouldn't that frost Republicans

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

So an interesting name came up for Biden's list of potential Attorney Generals: Judge Merrick Garland. Man wouldn't that frost Republicans

I think Republicans have moved on from Garland. It's the Democrats who haven't.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

So an interesting name came up for Biden's list of potential Attorney Generals: Judge Merrick Garland. Man wouldn't that frost Republicans

that will just create another federal court vacancy for Trump to place another 33 year old who doesn't know the first thing about courtroom law.

[Brian Swartz]

Biden would be the one nominating the replacement, not Trump.

[stevew]

they won't get a single judge thru in 4 years. The second trump presidency will be even worse with judges.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by stevew

they won't get a single judge thru in 4 years. The second trump presidency will be even worse with judges.

Welcome to the dark side, stevew. It sucks here.

[Brian Swartz]

I thought we didn't like far-out conspiracy theories around here. Clearly I was mistaken.

[stevew]

The Dems lose 9 electoral votes in 2024 if the map stays exactly the same. Trump would only have to flip 2 of PA/GA/AZ to win.

[Brian Swartz]

Only one president (Alexander) ever lost re-election and then won again. That was over 130 years ago. Not to mention that Obama got over 300 judges confirmed, including 15 or so even in the acrimonious 2015 and after period with the whole Garland fiasco.

The idea that nobody gets confirmed assumes bad things happen in Georgia runoffs, bad things happen in the '22 midterms, and nobody even moderate gets by a divided Senate. Add on to that Trump winning in '24 when he'll almost certainly either be in jail or in another country if he's even still alive - he'd be 78 then ... QAnon has nothing on this theory.