Joe Biden Might as Well Be a Republican - by Norm Solomon

[Karl Frederick]

Norman Solomon tries to set Joe Biden's record on fire . . .

"Recent criticism of Joe Biden for praising Dick Cheney as “a decent man” and Mike Pence as “a decent guy” merely scratches the surface of what’s wrong with the current frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination. His compulsion to vouch for the decency of Republican leaders — while calling Donald Trump an “aberration” — is consistent with Biden’s political record. It sheds light on why he’s probably the worst Democrat running for president.
After several decades of cutting corporate-friendly deals with GOP legislators — often betraying the interests of core Democratic constituencies in the process — Biden has a big psychological and political stake in denying that the entire GOP agenda is repugnant."

(Continued here)

[cyberanvil]

Democrats are headed to a Goldwater moment. The people want a Moderate and the politicians want a Socialist. can you spell landslide? and no, it's not Blue.

[Glia]

You have that exactly backwards. Depending on which "people" you are referring to, the people want a candidate who is consistently and genuinely on the left, and not afraid of socialism.

Democrats are headed to a Goldwater moment. The people want a Moderate and the politicians want a Socialist. can you spell landslide? and no, it's not Blue.

[cyberanvil]

You have that exactly backwards. Depending on which "people" you are referring to, the people want a candidate who is consistently and genuinely on the left, and not afraid of socialism.

And therein lies the rub. The two Coasts are not representative of the Democratic body. Living in Progressiveland, it's easy to get un-objective views and expectations. Poor old Joe is so disfunctional and needs to be put out to pasture. But he is the best chance at beating Trump. Why is he ahead in the polling? Maybe taken as a whole, the Democratic party is not ready for Ultra Left. How else to explain ole Joe being the leader of the pack?

[Glia]

so far the left/Demo candidate who has consistently shown an ability to "beat trump" is bernie. In 2016 bernie did great in the middle of the country, especially among young voters. If everyone who *wanted* to vote for bernie in the primaries could have done so, he would have bagged the nomination.

Joe may be ahead in polling among old white corn farmers and members of dying unions, a demographic traditionally considered 'most likely voters', but that is about it. Just about all of Joe's donations come from big corporations who know he will deliver for them. He is also getting his tired old ass kicked in the debates.

The old-guard corporatist establishment of the Democratic party is not ready for ultra-left or democratic socialists; however, most of the members/voters, especially those under age 35 or so, really are. If the middle of the country is so stuck in the mud, then why is a gay mayor from Indiana so popular? even 10 years ago it would be difficult to imagine that an openly homosexual man would be a military veteran elected to public office.

things have changed a lot, but the "traditional" media keeps ginning up the same horse-race. they have been de-facto choosing our candidates for a long time. thanks to the Internet, their reign is rapidly coming to an end.

[cyberanvil]

Joe may be ahead in polling among old white corn farmers and members of dying unions, a demographic traditionally considered 'most likely voters', but that is about it. ...

Polls can't be that wrong. Too many showing Biden 13 points ahead of Bernie.
"Buttigieg at 5 percent, O'Rourke at 3 percent and Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) at 3 percent were the only other candidates above 2 percent."

How popular is Mayor Pete? He and Beto are fading.

[Glia]

You missed my point.

Buttigieg being on the debate stage at all is indicative of the sea change that is unfolding.

Polls can be wrong, but more importantly they can be rigged to provide a false or misleading result. Recently there was a good post by Rico Boccia on this subject in the Does it take 22 Democrats to change a light bulb? thread.

[SonomaPatientsCoop]

so far the left/Demo candidate who has consistently shown an ability to "beat trump" is bernie....

And... that is why Trump won and will win again. The arrogance of a too small portion of the "Democrats" who write off the rest of the country as ignorant and not knowing what's best for them.

You do realize that Biden has a 2 to 1 lead over Bernie... in polling that at this time allows people to pick their ideal candidate rather then face the harder realities of later polling of picking who they think can win.

Anyone want to place bets on whether Bernie (and/or someone else) will run as a 3rd party if (no, not if, *when* ) they don't secure the nomination?

As the world stands right now Trump will easily secure a second election. Because as divided as the country is - the Democrats are splintered.

[Glia]

No, I do not "realize" that biden has a 2:1 lead over Bernie because it is not the case.

What demographic is supposedly supporting Biden in such great numbers? Who are these people? Where are they?

btw, trump's approval rating is dropping, so it is not like he is some gigantic unassailable monolith of popularity.

The conventions and the general election are still a long way off. In 2015 there were some 15+ candidates running for the Republican nomination, often referred to as the "clown car" of candidates. Jeb Bush was considered the heir-apparent shoo-in. Among the clowns was a poser Republican, widely considered to be a joke candidate, who knew how to play the TV media like a fiddle and ended up winning.

A lot can happen in a year.

And... that is why Trump won and will win again. The arrogance of a too small portion of the "Democrats" who write off the rest of the country as ignorant and not knowing what's best for them.

You do realize that Biden has a 2 to 1 lead over Bernie...

[cyberanvil]

To some degree, Sanders has been a victim of his own success.

“Last time when I was campaigning here in Iowa, I had ideas that many people in the political establishment and the media establishment thought were really radical. Far out,” he said, with a bit of ’60s hippie intonation as a crowd of 100 or so sweltered inside his storefront campaign office in downtown Ottumwa. “Well, a lot has changed over the last four years.”

https://www.latimes.com/politics/sto...crat-president

[cyberanvil]

What demographic is supposedly supporting Biden in such great numbers? Who are these people? Where are they?

btw, trump's approval rating is dropping, so it is not like he is some gigantic unassailable monolith of popularity.

The conventions and the general election are still a long way off. In 2015 there were some 15+ candidates running for the Republican nomination, often referred to as the "clown car" of candidates. Jeb Bush was considered the heir-apparent shoo-in. Among the clowns was a poser Republican, widely considered to be a joke candidate, who knew how to play the TV media like a fiddle and ended up winning.

A lot can happen in a year.

"One of the questions asked Democratic voters whether they will vote for a candidate with a "bold, new agenda" or one "who will provide steady, reliable leadership." Fully three-quarters of respondents want the latter, with just 25 percent interested in the sort of "bold, new agenda" that virtually all Democratic candidates are peddling so far."
(Poll referenced is by Fox News, see details here -Barry )

From Reason.com: This One New Poll of Democrats Explains Why Donald Trump Will Be Reelected

[Barry]

No, I do not "realize" that biden has a 2:1 lead over Bernie because it is not the case...

That is the case. From Real Clear Politics:

[SonomaPatientsCoop]

No, I do not "realize" that biden has a 2:1 lead over Bernie because it is not the case.

What demographic is supposedly supporting Biden in such great numbers? Who are these people? Where are they?

Well, here's just one source. Or use your favorite search engine.

As to "who are these people" ? They are hard working americans that make up the majority of this country. People that don't live in the liberal la-la land of NYC or a few enclaves along the west coast. Some are people who voted for Trump because they couldn't vote for Hillary (don't blame them per se) and sure as %!*# couldn't vote for Bernie)

Your comments- you still seem to be in denial that Trump resonated with a large swath of americans. Still does. Or that there are millions who are Dems or Independents who are very centrist. "It's the economy stupid" kinda sums it up in a way. The millions of Americans who are just trying to get by, raise their families, hopefully have a better life. They tend to vote on at best a few issues that directly affect them and their families. Jobs. Housing. And often foreign relations because their kids overwhelmingly make up the military and are in harms way.

Everyone thought I was crazy when I said Trump would win. But I spend time outside of the liberal bubble. I get to see what peope in the majority of America are actually thinking. Hell- just got out of the bay/nbay area and you'll see there's a huge portion of your fellow Californians who will *not* vote for Biden, Warren, Harris...

Tell me your thoughts- just *why* did the clown outsider Trump win in 2016?

[sealwatcher]

Reason, the Libertarian POV: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason_(magazine)

...From Reason.com:This One New Poll of Democrats Explains Why Donald Trump Will Be Reelected

[Glia]

Once again, who are these people being surveyed? How was this poll conducted? what is the +/- error rate? How frequently was the survey done? are the same people being surveyed every time?

One thing that this graph does show is a lot of candidates having "bubbles" of popularity followed by a slump and then basically a wiggly but flattened line. The lines for Bernie and Biden are almost mirror images.

My hunch, and hope, is that Biden will be playing the role that Jeb Bush played in 2015: early popularity with a lot of corporate donations followed by a big fizzle.

Bill Maher pegged it when he made the observation during the August 2nd Real Time episode that Biden is like non-dairy coffee "creamer": nobody really likes it, but it does the job in a pinch.

That is the case. From Real Clear Politics:

[Glia]

How is that being a "victim"? It sounds like successful messaging!

To some degree, Sanders has been a victim of his own success.

[Barry]

How is that being a "victim"? It sounds like successful messaging!

Bernie was successful in 2016 of gaining a large part of the Democratic base to support his "political revolution" such that many of the 2020 candidates share significant elements of his revolutionary platform. Most notably, Elizabeth Warren has adopted his Medicare For All plan. Warren is a better messenger than Bernie, for a host of reasons (younger, less grouchy, female, etc.) So like Moses, his role is to lead the way to the promised land, but not enter it.

A couple of other points: Elizabeth and Bernie are in the same lane, though their supporters have distinctly different demographics (Bernie's supporters are younger, less educated, less engaged in politics, and IMO, more aggressive). Their inevitable showdown is coming. My sense is that it is not going to be pretty, and Warren will emerge victorious... at least in that lane.

I also think that Medicare For All is not wise politically, even if it may be the right answer. I think a fair share of Biden's support comes from people who don't want to be compelled to change their health care against their wishes. This is a losing general election issue! Polling clearly indicates less than a majority support for MFA once it get's passed the rainbows and puppies stage and people become aware that taxes will need to be raised and that they need to give up their private insurance. And that's before the Republican fear-mongering has even started!

I'm hoping Mayor Pete heeds David Axelrod's advice and fleshes out his Medicare For All Who Want It plan and then confronts Bernie and Elizabeth on it. I think Medicare For All is going to turn out to be Warren's poison pill (hopefully during the primary, rather than the general), and Mayor Pete's winning ticket.

The hit against Biden's, and presumably Pete's, plans is that it doesn't cover all people. I'm guessing this is because of the refusal of the Medicaid expansion that was originally part of Obamacare, that the Supreme Court made optional. There's been a steady increase in the number of states who are approving of the expansion. I think it is very effective Democratic talking point in several red states and hopefully they will succumb to the seductive federal funding eventually, perhaps bringing Democrats to power is those states.

It's unfortunate that these plans won't cover everybody initially, but since Medicare For All will not happen (either because Bernie/Elizabeth don't win the nomination, or the general, or it gets blocked in the senate) it's the best that can happen now.

[cyberanvil]

"One of the questions asked Democratic voters whether they will vote for a candidate with a "bold, new agenda" or one "who will provide steady, reliable leadership." Fully three-quarters of respondents want the latter, with just 25 percent interested in the sort of "bold, new agenda" that virtually all Democratic candidates are peddling so far."
(Poll referenced is by Fox News, see details here -Barry )

From Reason.com: This One New Poll of Democrats Explains Why Donald Trump Will Be Reelected

Questions seemed reasonable. does someone have a problem with the methodology?

[Glia]

Your comparison of Bernie to Moses is quite apt... they are about the same age when they completed their mission, wave their arms around while talking, and come from a similar gene pool. Bernie could drop out of the presidential race today and and still leave an admirable legacy. Honestly I do not see him getting the nomination, and that is for the best.

Opening up Medicare to those who want to buy in to it, aka The Public Option, is a good opening strategy. It does not force anything on anyone. Further, it would open the door to an organic transition to a program much like Australia's: there is a public insurance and health service available to all, and some private insurance plans available to those who want them and can pay for them.

The important thing is to incrementally disconnect medical care coverage from employment -- or as Andrew Yang put it: "We're going to get healthcare off the backs of businesses and families, and we'll watch businesses and families recover and bloom - that's the argument we should be making to the American people."

Hopefully Warren will back-pedal from a single-payer program (ie Medicare whether you want it or not) to The Public Option. She is a good candidate with no skeletons in the closet (unlike Hillary), and what you see is what you get.

Regarding Mayor Pete... too young and not enough experience. Maybe he can try again in 2028 after being Governor of Indiana for 1-2 terms or a run a business. I really do not like that he has apparently been scheming with the Demo Establishment to knee-cap Bernie. In addition, his religious schtick is annoying.

Bernie was successful in 2016 ....

[Barry]

...Hopefully Warren will back-pedal from a single-payer program. ...

Regarding Mayor Pete... too young and not enough experience. ...

I'd like Warren to let go of MFA, but it's not going happen. And her embracement of MFA speaks to her lack of political acumen ... she's an over-achieving technical wonk. I think she's great and should be offered any role she wants in a Buttigieg administration from VP down (Secretary of the Treasury?). I don't think she has Pete's Jedi moves that can sidestep Trump's swipes. His Pocahontas dig knocked her on her fanny for months!

Healthcare should definitely be decoupled from employment. I'd like to hear Pete, Kamala and Joe address this point.

Pete has more executive experience than Obama had, and nearly as much elective office experience. He's a gifted political talent. If he manages to win this thing, that will be the proof that he has the chops. I think he's the best bet to beat trump and heal the country. Have you listened to some of his long form interviews?

[podfish]

Once again, who are these people being surveyed? How was this poll conducted? what is the +/- error rate? How frequently was the survey done? are the same people being surveyed every time? ....
Bill Maher pegged it when he made the observation during the August 2nd Real Time episode that Biden is like non-dairy coffee "creamer": nobody really likes it, but it does the job in a pinch.

I think attacking "the polls" is based on wishful thinking, or on a world view where the obvious is unlikely because it's obvious, and thus a sign that they're fooling the sheeple again. There's a complex ecosystem around polling, complex enough that what looks like consensus probably is pretty accurate just due to 'market forces' - polls are based on statistically valid sample data, and the polls themselves are data for meta-analysis. The information from them is valid, if you're not so unsophisticated that you expect them to give binary winner/loser results.

Also, although I don't know the majority of them personally, the existence of millions of people who find Trump kinda the guy, better than those silly elitist leftist who want to give away free stuff, is pretty well established. And even more established is that most people who vote are not the ones who would engage in this forum or ones like it. They have half-baked opinions and aren't the least ashamed of it.

Fortunately many of them will vote along with those of us who care and pay attention, and against those who also care, pay attention, and for some inexplicable reason still are willing to vote for Trump. A lot of them might do what some here fear or hope for -- vote against someone who's not middle-of-the-road enough, but I think we'll find out that most are not all that scared of socialism, or immigrant takeovers. The pre-convention stuff isn't all that interesting to most people. Once someone emerges from it, we'll find out whether I'm right or not. I suspect that the difference between Biden and Beto won't be enough to win or lose this time. I kinda doubt that the difference between Bernie and Hillary would have tipped it last time either.

[cyberanvil]

I suspect that the difference between Biden and Beto won't be enough to win or lose this time. I kinda doubt that the difference between Bernie and Hillary would have tipped it last time either.

Beto? You mentioned Beto? I'm shocked. Mayor Pete pretty much beats Beto. Although Pete's age works against him.

[podfish]

Beto? You mentioned Beto? I'm shocked. Mayor Pete pretty much beats Beto. Although Pete's age works against him.

I was going to use Buttigieg but the alliteration worked ok with Beto, and saved me from spell-checking.

[rossmen]

Trump won, the polls were wrong. Hopefully algorithms were improved by this fiasco. I understand the clown win by the changing world. For the us to continue to exist think last man standing. We live in dark times. Politics in democracy is crowd source decision making. This has proved to be the most accurate predictor. News you agree with is a distraction. Trump might win again.

I think attacking "the polls" is based on wishful thinking, ....

[podfish]

Trump won, the polls were wrong. Hopefully algorithms were improved by this fiasco.

unsophisticated polls were wrong. Read Nate Silver's explanation or just look at the definition of statistics.

The polls should never be interpreted as a binary prediction. Nothing surprising in a mathematical sense happened - to oversimplify, every century we should have someone win who had a 1-in-25 chance of winning.

(Sorry, that's totally mathematically not true... but it is unsurprising that someone with less than a 50% chance, or even a 40% chance, wins. Even twice in a row.)

But even more than that, polls have margins of error. Add that to the dice roll and you'll find that predictions based on polling aren't going to "come true" significant amounts of the time.


(Nate Silver explains quite well where they could have improved, which will help limit the margins of error, but still will never make them perfectly predictive. Statistics is not algebra, 2+2 is a different kind of math altogether).

[Barry]

Here's a good analysis of the 2016 polling margin of error and bias:

Washington Post: The 2016 national polls are looking less wrong after final election tallies

[cyberanvil]

podfish wrote:
Also, although I don't know the majority of them personally, the existence of millions of people who find Trump kinda the guy, better than those silly elitist leftist who want to give away free stuff, is pretty well established. And even more established is that most people who vote are not the ones who would engage in this forum or ones like it. They have half-baked opinions and aren't the least ashamed of it.

Fortunately many of them will vote along with those of us who care and pay attention, and against those who also care, pay attention, and for some inexplicable reason still are willing to vote for Trump. A lot of them might do what some here fear or hope for -- vote against someone who's not middle-of-the-road enough, but I think we'll find out that most are not all that scared of socialism, or immigrant takeovers. The pre-convention stuff isn't all that interesting to most people. Once someone emerges from it, we'll find out whether I'm right or not. I suspect that the difference between Biden and Beto won't be enough to win or lose this time. I kinda doubt that the difference between Bernie and Hillary would have tipped it last time either.

The Republicans will frame the election as Socialism vs Capitalism. I don't believe that the people are prepared to accept Socialism (outside of the two Coasts of course). But time will tell.

[wisewomn]

Unfortunately, many people don't even know what socialism is, except a bugaboo word. They don't realize that programs they support--Medicare, Social Security, police and fire, etc--are all socialistic. So they will vote against their own self-interest. Again.

[cyberanvil]

Unfortunately, many people don't even know what socialism is, except a bugaboo word. They don't realize that programs they support--Medicare, Social Security, police and fire, etc--are all socialistic. So they will vote against their own self-interest. Again.

If you'd stayed with Social Security you'd be home free. Including all the rest makes your statement false.

Quora: Are military, fire department and police all examples of "socialism" as some people claim?

[podfish]

...

Quora: Are military, fire department and police all examples of "socialism" as some people claim?

now that's quite an authoritative site you quote! I'm certainly convinced. Although, with only three votes for your apparent choice, and two for one that refutes it, the situation is less clear. I'm so confused by this lack of agreement!! As much fun as site-citation-ping-pong is, it's not really a game with much more relevance than physical ping-pong itself, though it's got more variety.

This whole focus on socialism as a political white whale is pretty bizarre anyway. The word clearly represents something to the people who sling it around, but it equally clearly has no more concrete meaning than the word "jazz". I know Donnie and Marie ain't it, but is Mahavishnu Orchestra?