Is Mr Biden Trying to Lose the Election?

[Kenny]

The reason evangelicals like @KenS support Trump is pretty obvious. It's the abortion issue. Abortion is one issue that neither side is willing to compromise on.

There is more than just that but it is part of it.

 

[bobhikes]

I dont see it. Everything I have read indicates Donald Trump is losing big and bringing down the Republican party. It is looking like a Biden Presidency with a democratic house and senate.

The Bernie effect whereas a group of his voters didnt vote for Hillary is not happening with Biden

Every report on the independents shows the 60 to 70 percent against Trump and 40 to 50 percent for Biden.

The Republicans have multiple groups opposing Donald Trump with money

Every report on the Republican base shows it shrinking.

Maybe I'm reading the wrong articles but even Trump and the Republicans seem to be panicking.

 

[BSM1]

You apparently missed hundreds of my posts, starting under Bush Jr., who was sitting in the White House when I first joined

And I'm not sure I'm a better person for it...

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Your disagreement does not a straw man make.

You already opened that can of worms by denying I have encountered anti-LGBT atheist Libertarians. I said you didnt that road, it's not a wise path, and this is why. If my claim is a strawman, then so is yours.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Not making a support for Trump but rather refuting your position.King David murdered and committed adultery but God forgave and called him His friend. Saul murdered people but God chose him and he became the Apostle Paul.

But in reference to your position... it isn't that simple as we had lying Hilary or him. There are other reasons that people vote... as it was for me. It was just about the Court system and, more importantly, the Supreme Court.

Hillary isn't scum trash of atrociousand horrible character. And yku say "lying Hillary?" Trump lies way more frequently than her or any other politician.

 

[Kenny]

Hillary isn't scum trash of atrociousand horrible character. And yku say "lying Hillary?" Trump lies way more frequently than her or any other politician.

My point is that both had flaws... so I voted for the Supreme Court.

 

[Revoltingest]

You already opened that can of worms by denying I have encountered anti-LGBT atheist Libertarians. I said you didnt that road, it's not a wise path, and this is why. If my claim is a strawman, then so is yours.

Still agonizing over that?
Move on, toots!
Don't beat dead horses with sleeping bears....or something like that.
We have Biden & Harris to fight over now.
Odd....I think she's a useful choice for him.
Yet many Dems think she's wrong.
Go figure.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Still agonizing over that?
Move on, toots!
Don't beat dead horses with sleeping bears....or something like that.
We have Biden & Harris to fight over now.
Odd....I think she's a useful choice for him.
Yet many Dems think she's wrong.
Go figure.

As I said, you already opened that can of worms, so I am returning the favor.

 

[exchemist]

So...as an Australian...I'm very strong on this. Placing a peg in the centre lands you both centrists AND people to the left/right of that peg, since they are not going to vote for the other side.
However...
We have mandatory voting. And the US has low participation rates. So I'm never quite sure how much a US election is about convincing people to vote, as opposed to convincing them to vote for you (if you can see the difference).
@Sunstone, does that make any sense?

A shrewd point.

 

[exchemist]

Police reform is a "left wing" cause?

I'm sure it will be seen as that by your average suburban voter. Don't get me wrong, I think there is plenty of evidence that the US needs to look again at the role of the police vs other social agencies - not to mention police methods, but what I am questioning is whether this will be the issue that gets out the vote of the floating voter. Loose talk of "defunding" the police seems to have the potential to scare a lot of people into thinking that what is proposed is to get rid of the police altogether - a ludicrous notion, but one the Republicans will be sure to encourage, in an attempt to paint the Democrats as extreme and dangerous radicals.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm sure it will be seen as that by your average suburban voter. Don't get me wrong, I think there is plenty of evidence that the US needs to look again at the role of the police vs other social agencies - not to mention police methods, but what I am questioning is whether this will be the issue that gets out the vote of the floating voter. Loose talk of "defunding" the police seems to have the potential to scare a lot of people into thinking that what is proposed is to get rid of the police altogether - a ludicrous notion, but one the Republicans will be sure to encourage, in an attempt to paint the Democrats as extreme and dangerous radicals.

Sometimes leaders will take positions
that don't represent all of their party.
That can be useful to garnar max power.

 

[Sunstone]

@Sunstone, does that make any sense?

It makes quite a bit of sense. I think just about any political analyst would tell you that turn-out is key to winning elections here for both the Republicans and the Democrats. The dynamic goes something like this, Dave. In general, there are more Democrats in America than there are Republicans. However, Republicans tend to turn out more faithfully than Democrats. Meanwhile, the majority of eligible Americans don't vote at all.

Consequently, the Republicans try to suppress voter turnout, while the Democrats try to encourage it. That's simplifying it a little bit, but you get the idea. Republicans are big on voter suppression, Democrats are big on voter registration, and other turn-out tools.

Now, Mr. Trump is an exceptionally unpopular president. Hence, this year you are seeing an unprecedented voter suppression campaign from him. He's doing things to suppress the vote never done before -- most notably, he's slowing down mail delivery to mess with mail-in ballots, which polls show are much more likely to be used by Democrats than by Republicans.

People who think Mr. Biden has this thing wrapped up are politically naive. Mr. Trump is within striking distance of Mr. Biden even without voter suppression. In addition, Mr. Biden seems hellbent on alienating the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. He talks a fine line about reaching out to it, but the establishment Democrats, very much including Mr. Biden, see this election as a shoe-in for their candidate (due to Mr. Trump's unpopularity), so they do not feel they need the progressives behind them to win.

Time will tell what happens.

 

[Tambourine]

Yes. But I never heard that it was mandatory that they always do.

I didn't want to suggest that it would be mandatory, just that it should be considered a situation that is likely to come up at some point.
And not all issues can (or should be) compromised on.

Your posts suggest you may not be old enough to vote --- are you?

I've been an active voter for 21 years, though Austria's political landscape is also a very different one than either Canada or the US.

Interesting. I thought @Tambourine said it in a sighing tone.

I would say, a little closer to acerbic.

 

[Sunstone]

Interesting... who do you think he should have picked and why?

The most competent black woman politician he could find who is also a progressive -- that is, in the Sanders wing of the Party.

 

[Sunstone]

There's always ProgressivePunch.


The Kamala Harris pick will attract/energize many. It will disturb/dismay others (on both the left and the right). Racism, male chauvinism, and identity politics will largely determine the net regional result, while the distortion imposed by our electoral college system will determine the import of these regional results. The calculus of all this is beyond me, but I suspect that the gains will outweigh the looses.

At the same time, I can think of nothing so dangerous at this time than is framing the good as the enemy of the perfect. Both Biden and Harris could have been far more progressive in the past. Much the same could be said of Obama. So we keep up the pressure. Such is politics. But the fact remains, a Biden/Harris regime will represent an immense qualitative improvement.

I'll be 75 in September. I'm bless with a wonderful wife, kids, and grandkids, and this November I'll likely cast the most important vote in my life.

To be clear, I am determined to vote for Biden/Harris come any obstacle to doing so short of being struck by a comet. For instance, I will be dropping my ballot off at the El Passo County Clerk's office, rather than mailing it in, because the Post Office is being tampered with.

However, I do think there is a risk we'll lose the election if the Democratic establishment remains so convinced they have this thing wrapped up that they can afford to alienate the progressive wing of their party, to say nothing of the other groups they are not reaching out to.

In all likelihood, this is one of the two or three most fateful elections in American history to date. I can only think of the elections that brought Lincoln and FDR to power as possibly rivaling it.

 

[Sunstone]

...rather than the more cerebral approach of comparing progressiveness?

Progressives accounted for about 42% of the Democratic primary voters. If that's your notion of "cerebral", I would suggest you are gravely mistaken. While Ms. Harris was the darling of the media during the primaries, she stirred up almost zero enthusiasm for her candidacy -- not even with Blacks and women. She finished dead last in total number of votes among all the candidates. Again, if those facts are your notion of "cerebral", I wonder how you are defining the word?

 

[Sunstone]

So how did Trump win?

In 2016, Mr Trump won the electoral college but lost the popular vote by about 3 million. He won the electoral college by wining three key states that were predicted to go for Ms. Clinton. He won them by less than 100,000 votes.

 

[Kenny]

Consequently, the Republicans try to suppress voter turnout, while the Democrats try to encourage it. That's simplifying it a little bit, but you get the idea. Republicans are big on voter suppression, Democrats are big on voter registration, and other turn-out tools.

I think that is a political position with no substantive support.

My viewpoint, of course.

 

[Sunstone]

I think that is a political position with no substantive support.

My viewpoint, of course.

While we disagree, I trust the sincerity of your views.

 

[icehorse]

Progressives accounted for about 42% of the Democratic primary voters. If that's your notion of "cerebral", I would suggest you are gravely mistaken. While Ms. Harris was the darling of the media during the primaries, she stirred up almost zero enthusiasm for her candidacy -- not even with Blacks and women. She finished dead last in total number of votes among all the candidates. Again, if those facts are your notion of "cerebral", I wonder how you are defining the word?

Not what I'm saying at all

My thought is that most voters aren't voting "because progressive".