Joe Biden 2020 campaign megathread v2

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

https://twitter.com/ArthurSchwartz/status/1165003819413135360

Take this old fool out to pasture.  It's amazing he hasn't sh!t himself during a speech yet.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

https://twitter.com/ArthurSchwartz/status/1165003819413135360
Take this old fool out to pasture.  It's amazing he hasn't sh!t himself during a speech yet.

What a disgusting thing to say.  So we should euthanize him (that's what "take out to pasture" means) because he stumbled over his words while saying "not only quality but also affordable"?  By the way if you bother to watch the video he corrects himself immediately after the quote ends.

This is what I mean about the anti-Biden opposition being just ludicrous.  Here you have an out-of-context quote that's perfectly fine in context, and even out of context is just an obvious minor verbal slip from a man with a lifelong speech impediment, and you're calling for him to be euthanized.

Lol God you're sensitive.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

https://twitter.com/ArthurSchwartz/status/1165003819413135360
Take this old fool out to pasture.  It's amazing he hasn't sh!t himself during a speech yet.

What a disgusting thing to say.  So we should euthanize him (that's what "take out to pasture" means) because he stumbled over his words while saying "not only quality but also affordable"?  By the way if you bother to watch the video he corrects himself immediately after the quote ends.

This is what I mean about the anti-Biden opposition being just ludicrous.  Here you have an out-of-context quote that's perfectly fine in context, and even out of context is just an obvious minor verbal slip from a man with a lifelong speech impediment, and you're calling for him to be euthanized.

Lol God you're sensitive.

What are you, 12?

What can I say?  Triggering you is half the fun here.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

https://twitter.com/SteveGuest/status/1165372396607553536

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Pssst: They’re going to call Biden a commie socialist too, and they’ll get him to attack members of his own party too. They called f**king Obamacare socialist!

Of course they are, but I'm repeating myself. This has already been discussed (at least twice), and I obviously admitted to the fact that they will do so. BUT, Bernie and Warren (and their policy proposals) will be labeled as such, at a rate 2 or 3 times worse than Biden. If Obamacare (or any future Biden amendments supporting it) were called "socialist" by the right, most easily will Bernie/Warren proposals be labeled as communist (farther left).

They will label literally anything Biden does as "communist."  I don't expect single-payer to happen any time soon but if you oppose single-payer because you think Republicans will be less hostile towards a public option or multi-payer system, then you are delusional.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

In which Biden parrots Reagan's "welfare queens driving luxury cars" myth:

https://twitter.com/samstein/status/1167078894190682112?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctw...

This is, I think, a bit worse than a gaffe.  I am sure that the cuckgressives and blue avatars will disagree.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

In which Biden parrots Reagan's "welfare queens driving luxury cars" myth:

https://twitter.com/samstein/status/1167078894190682112?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctw...
This is, I think, a bit worse than a gaffe.  I am sure that the cuckgressives and blue avatars will disagree.

That's literally not what the article says at all.  Here's the EXACT BIDEN QUOTE

"We are all too familiar with the stories of welfare mothers driving luxury cars and leading lifestyles that mirror the rich and famous.  Whether they are exaggerated or not, these stories underlie a broad social concern that the welfare system has broken down."

He's not making up the stories, he's gently acknowledging that other people believe these made up stories.  There's a massive difference between the two and your misrepresentation is incredibly dishonest.

He literally uses the term "welfare mothers," which is a common right-wing trope about welfare recipients that typically has racial connotations attached.  He uses the rest of the article to propagate right-wing talking points for welfare reform.  It comes as no surprise that Biden would later vote for the PRWORA that Clinton signed, which pushed poor families off TANF and contributed to rising income inequality by doing nothing to help low-wage workers escape poverty.

Honestly, a better way of spinning this would have just been to say that it was a different time, Biden (like most politicians) was swindled by anecdotes and stereotypes, and his views have probably evolved since then.  But you didn't even do that.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Unless the Democrats manage to somehow win 60 Senate seats, I would argue that whoever gets the nomination would in effect be a lame-duck president if they were to defeat Trump, simply because Congress is too polarized.  Save for a Supreme Court appointment or two, the next Democratic president will likely accomplish very little for that reason alone.

Of course, any president who enters their first term while suffering from dementia is going to have a hard time being an effective leader regardless.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Of course, any president who enters their first term while suffering from dementia is going to have a hard time being an effective leader regardless.

This talking point needs to end, Biden is not senile. He just occasionally makes a few gaffes, these are the same ageist attacks that Republicans used against Bill Nelson in Florida. The "progressives" are repeating this Republican talking point, which will damage him, should he be our nominee. He probably has the best chance to beat Trump. So, progressives, why are you repeating GOP talking points, don't you want Trump to lose

Except the gaffes are not occasional anymore.

If you look at recent presidents, they generally haven't been successfully at pushing major pieces of their agenda through Congress after their first two years anyway. If Biden can pass a couple major pieces of legislation in his first two years and then stay reasonably popular so that Democrats have a chance of holding his seat in 2024, I will be more than happy. And notwithstanding OP's speculation on Biden's health, I think that's a very plausible scenario.

Unless the Democrats manage to somehow win 60 Senate seats, I would argue that whoever gets the nomination would in effect be a lame-duck president if they were to defeat Trump, simply because Congress is too polarized.  Save for a Supreme Court appointment or two, the next Democratic president will likely accomplish very little for that reason alone.

Of course, any president who enters their first term while suffering from dementia is going to have a hard time being an effective leader regardless.

I anticipate the legislative filibuster will likely be abolished in the next few years, this is more likely with a progressive President. And even otherwise, Democrats would still probably be able to get around it with some of their agenda using reconciliation. The filibuster has been declining for years and the incentives to preserve it are being removed.

Unless the Democrats manage to somehow win 60 Senate seats, I would argue that whoever gets the nomination would in effect be a lame-duck president

Republicans passed a major tax bill in the last Congress despite having just 52 senators. Obviously the 115th Congress could have gone better for Republicans overall (see the defeat of their Obamacare repeal bill), but let's not forget about the reconciliation process.

Obama still clearly accomplished more during his first two years than Trump ever did in his.  I don't think you can pass single-payer, or even a public option for that matter, under the reconciliation process unless the rules are changed.  And changing those rules could very easily backfire when the pendulum swings the other way again.  If Manchin and Sinema control the Senate agenda (which is the best likely scenario for Democrats after 2020 at this point), the filibuster's not going away.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Unless the Democrats manage to somehow win 60 Senate seats, I would argue that whoever gets the nomination would in effect be a lame-duck president if they were to defeat Trump, simply because Congress is too polarized.  Save for a Supreme Court appointment or two, the next Democratic president will likely accomplish very little for that reason alone.

Of course, any president who enters their first term while suffering from dementia is going to have a hard time being an effective leader regardless.

“Save for a Supreme Court appointment or two?” You mean, like, the most important and longest-lasting thing a president does?

That's assuming Democrats even win a majority in the Senate, obviously.

But yes.  While holding those SCOTUS seats is not insignificant, the next Democratic president's term will probably resemble Obama's second term and their list of domestic policy achievements will be very small.  Obama got lucky by winning during the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression and carrying just enough Senate Democrats by for a bare filibuster-proof majority comprised of people like Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson.

My point is that even in a best case scenario, the most the left can hope for is retaining our 4-5 minority on the Supreme Court and undoing Trump's executive decisions.  I don't say this to discourage getting active and voting, I say it because people (but particularly the left) put too much faith in our institutions as they currently exist and expecting too much to come out of the next Democratic administration - regardless of who's nominated - is short-sighted, and will only lead to greater disappointment when that person fails to deliver and the Democrats get shellacked again in the midterms.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Given that two-thirds of Americans support marijuana legalization and the only generation that doesn't give majority support for legalization is Boomers, I am convinced that Biden is a true believer on this.  I don't think he's so stupid to not be able to read a poll, but he like the majority of the ruling class opposes legalization because most of them grew up in the Reefer Madness era.

But public support for legalization at this point is high enough where not supporting it is politically toxic.  Nearly three-quarters of non-college-educated independents in the Rust Belt support legalization - they are, in fact, more likely to support legalization than college-educated voters.

Democrats are dumb so of course they support the candidate with the most right-wing, unpopular stance on weed as the front runner.  No, it is not an issue that is on top of most people's minds, but if the leading potential Democratic nominee can't see the writing on the wall and guide the party to embrace something that the vast majority of the American public supports, is he really as "electable" as his supporters insist he is?

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

https://twitter.com/CleveWootson/status/1197683838060814339

This guy's doing all he can to ensure that young voters stay home or vote third party and Trump gets reelected.  F#ck this condescending ass clown.