Joe Biden 2020 campaign megathread v2

[brucejoel99]

So he is basically saying because he once did her a favor she shouldn’t criticise him on policy. Very old school politician of him... Also California doesn’t nominate senators. She was elected by the people.

Not disagreeing with your overall point per se, but I believe that the California Democratic Party's convention did indeed endorse her a-la how they endorsed De Leon over Feinstein last year.

[History505]

People need to stop pretending that Biden kissing that girl was normal.

“Oh, but it was just his granddaughter!!”

Kissing grandchildren on the lips is not normal. I have never kissed my grandparents in my life. They don’t even hug me. They haven’t talked to me for years.

Don't even hug you? Wow, that's harsh to you.

[gf20202]

So he is basically saying because he once did her a favor she shouldn’t criticise him on policy. Very old school politician of him... Also California doesn’t nominate senators. She was elected by the people.

Not disagreeing with your overall point per se, but I believe that the California Democratic Party's convention did indeed endorse her a-la how they endorsed De Leon over Feinstein last year.

And Biden had nothing to do with it.

Biden spoke at the CA Democratic convention in February 2016.Harris and many many other California democrats asked him to as it brought press attention and fundraising in for the state party. But he didn't mention Harris once during his speech and it would have been premature to do so. It wasn't that type of speech.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-CLu3WMWqU

Harris then beat Sanchez by 20 points in the primary in June. It was only in July that Biden (simultaneously with Obama) endorsed Harris. The state party did endorse her at the convention, but that's hardly a nomination or binding electorally in anyway.
https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2016/07/obama-biden-endorse-calif-ag-kamala-harris-for-us-senate-103982

Biden's recall of this is flat out wrong and really shows his lack of preparedness and recall.

[brucejoel99]

People need to stop pretending that Biden kissing that girl was normal.

“Oh, but it was just his granddaughter!!”

Kissing grandchildren on the lips is not normal. I have never kissed my grandparents in my life. They don’t even hug me. They haven’t talked to me for years.

Can't tell if being facetious or not. If not, then you need healthier familial relationships, my friend.

[Shadows]

Go Uncle Joe. While Joe's record is pretty crap, Big Pharma Booker who defend Bain against Obama is making a total political attack vs Biden & so is Kamala who doesn't have too much of a different position than Biden on busing. Total political opportunism from 2 flip flopped & fake progressives who will do any mud slinging to win & have no decent policies.

I would love to see Biden take down Booker & Harris. Or maybe they should all destroy each other. I can see Gabbard going after Harris & maybe De Blasio goes after Booker or Biden or some random person. The 2nd debate is going to be awesome.

[John Dule]

Wait, you don't remember him saying "grub them by the pissy"??

I remembered him saying "seize the means of reproduction." Weird.

[Possiblymaybe]

So he is basically saying because he once did her a favor she shouldn’t criticise him on policy. Very old school politician of him... Also California doesn’t nominate senators. She was elected by the people.

Not disagreeing with your overall point per se, but I believe that the California Democratic Party's convention did indeed endorse her a-la how they endorsed De Leon over Feinstein last year.

And Biden had nothing to do with it.

Biden spoke at the CA Democratic convention in February 2016.Harris and many many other California democrats asked him to as it brought press attention and fundraising in for the state party. But he didn't mention Harris once during his speech and it would have been premature to do so. It wasn't that type of speech.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-CLu3WMWqU

Harris then beat Sanchez by 20 points in the primary in June. It was only in July that Biden (simultaneously with Obama) endorsed Harris. The state party did endorse her at the convention, but that's hardly a nomination or binding electorally in anyway.
https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2016/07/obama-biden-endorse-calif-ag-kamala-harris-for-us-senate-103982

Biden's recall of this is flat out wrong and really shows his lack of preparedness and recall.

Yeah, Warren is actually the one who endorsed Harris early (a couple of days after Harris announced she was running for president).

[Possiblymaybe]

Go Uncle Joe. While Joe's record is pretty crap, Big Pharma Booker who defend Bain against Obama is making a total political attack vs Biden & so is Kamala who doesn't have too much of a different position than Biden on busing. Total political opportunism from 2 flip flopped & fake progressives who will do any mud slinging to win & have no decent policies.

I would love to see Biden take down Booker & Harris. Or maybe they should all destroy each other. I can see Gabbard going after Harris & maybe De Blasio goes after Booker or Biden or some random person. The 2nd debate is going to be awesome.

So black candidates are opportunistic because they call out a candidate who talks nostalgically about the good old days of working with segregationists or challenge someone’s record of opposing one of the most central issues in the civil rights movement? Even when said black candidates have personal experience with the issue?
Here’s Kamalas sister talking about busing back in 2015. Was she also being opportunistic?
https://mobile.twitter.com/MissBeaE/status/1152274021125382144
Seems facetious to argue that a candidates record on defending civil rights is irrelevant when McDonnell and republicans want to dismantle civil rights for women and minorities.Biden literally said local authorities should have the final call.  And if you are having trouble understanding how problematic this is in relation to race then replace busing with abortion or Gay marriage in red states...
And tbh she threw him a soft ball. That he wasn’t prepared despite the busing debate raging on twitter and in black media and him literally bringing up working with pro segregationist himself, speaks volumes of how entitled he felt going into that debate.

Sidenote:  Kinda ironic that you are accusing Beto of being a flip flop while cheering on a man who flip flopped on the Hyde amendment within the space of a day..

[Ilhan Apologist]

Go Uncle Joe. While Joe's record is pretty crap, Big Pharma Booker who defend Bain against Obama is making a total political attack vs Biden & so is Kamala who doesn't have too much of a different position than Biden on busing. Total political opportunism from 2 flip flopped & fake progressives who will do any mud slinging to win & have no decent policies.

I would love to see Biden take down Booker & Harris. Or maybe they should all destroy each other. I can see Gabbard going after Harris & maybe De Blasio goes after Booker or Biden or some random person. The 2nd debate is going to be awesome.

So black candidates are opportunistic because they call out a candidate who talks nostalgically about the good old days of working with segregationists or challenge someone’s record of opposing one of the most central issues in the civil rights movement? Even when said black candidates have personal experience with the issue?
Here’s Kamalas sister talking about busing back in 2015. Was she also being opportunistic?
https://mobile.twitter.com/MissBeaE/status/1152274021125382144
Seems facetious to argue that a candidates record on defending civil rights is irrelevant when McDonnell and republicans want to dismantle civil rights for women and minorities.Biden literally said local authorities should have the final call.  And if you are having trouble understanding how problematic this is in relation to race then replace busing with abortion or Gay marriage in red states...
And tbh she threw him a soft ball. That he wasn’t prepared despite the busing debate raging on twitter and in black media and him literally bringing up working with pro segregationist himself, speaks volumes of how entitled he felt going into that debate.

Sidenote:  Kinda ironic that you are accusing Beto of being a flip flop while cheering on a man who flip flopped on the Hyde amendment within the space of a day..

It's hard to call Kamala's attack on Biden anything other than opportunistic considering SHE AGREES WITH HIM. But yes, civil rights are important.

[gf20202]

It's hard to call Kamala's attack on Biden anything other than opportunistic considering SHE AGREES WITH HIM. But yes, civil rights are important.

Kamala agrees with him today, but disagrees with where he stood in the seventies. How hard is that to comprehend that circumstances have changed four decades later? He also constantly misstates where he stood in the seventies, according to fact checkers.

[Rookie Yinzer]

The Biden ops on my TL were already tweeting out negative talking points about Booker as a pre-emptive strike.

Booker has Biden's team SHOOK. They're still putting out attacks on their personal pages. LOL.

[Ilhan Apologist]

It's hard to call Kamala's attack on Biden anything other than opportunistic considering SHE AGREES WITH HIM. But yes, civil rights are important.

Kamala agrees with him today, but disagrees with where he stood in the seventies. How hard is that to comprehend that circumstances have changed four decades later? He also constantly misstates where he stood in the seventies, according to fact checkers.

Which dmonstrates that Harris is talking anout the past while this election, like all others, is supposed to be about the future.

Eh, that's not fair. It's important what candidates' records look like.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Biden needs to go all out against Kamala and expose her for the lying SJW she is

[Mr. Smith]

Biden needs to go all out against Kamala and expose her for the lying SJW she is

How well did it work when various GOP candidates tried exposing Trump as the fraudster con-man again?

[brucejoel99]

Biden needs to go all out against Kamala and expose her for the lying SJW she is

[Possiblymaybe]

https://mobile.twitter.com/HenryJGomez/status/1154384052515934208

[Mr. Smith]

Wow, he's really opened himself up for attacks. It'll be interesting to see if anyone makes a point on that next round...or what Trump'll do.

[brucejoel99]

https://mobile.twitter.com/HenryJGomez/status/1154384052515934208

Wow, he's really opened himself up for attacks. It'll be interesting to see if anyone makes a point on that next round...or what Trump'll do.

So what? His point was literally that he was a public defender rather than a prosecutor like Harris. That isn't incorrect. This should in no way "open himself up for attacks."

[Possiblymaybe]

https://mobile.twitter.com/HenryJGomez/status/1154384052515934208

Wow, he's really opened himself up for attacks. It'll be interesting to see if anyone makes a point on that next round...or what Trump'll do.

So what? His point was literally that he was a public defender rather than a prosecutor like Harris. That isn't incorrect. This should in no way "open himself up for attacks."

The point is that he made it seem like he was some kind of noble criminal justice warrior compared to her when apparently he was a part time public defender for barely a year and nobody seems to remember what he actually did apart from defending a cow thief.  
Harris specialised in defending victims of domestic violence and sex crimes particularly children in her early career, so I don’t think soccer moms or whatever are gonna think “prosecutor bad, public defender good ‘ based on what kind of work they actually did.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

It's hard to call Kamala's attack on Biden anything other than opportunistic considering SHE AGREES WITH HIM. But yes, civil rights are important.

Kamala agrees with him today, but disagrees with where he stood in the seventies. How hard is that to comprehend that circumstances have changed four decades later? He also constantly misstates where he stood in the seventies, according to fact checkers.

Biden hasn't changed his position.  She agrees with where he stood in the 70s.

[Possiblymaybe]

It's hard to call Kamala's attack on Biden anything other than opportunistic considering SHE AGREES WITH HIM. But yes, civil rights are important.

Kamala agrees with him today, but disagrees with where he stood in the seventies. How hard is that to comprehend that circumstances have changed four decades later? He also constantly misstates where he stood in the seventies, according to fact checkers.

Biden hasn't changed his position.  She agrees with where he stood in the 70s.

No, you are confused, they clearly don’t agree on what was necessary in the 70-80s. She asked him specifically “ do you agree TODAY that you were wrong to oppose federally mandated busing back THEN?”. He first said he never opposed busing ( untrue) then made the argument that it should be left up to the local government which was basically the argument of pro segregationist at the time and marks him as being in direct opposition to the civil rights movement. Her argument was that the involvement of the federal government was necessary in red states not only in relation to central issues to the civil rights movement in the 60 and 70s such as busing but also to the women’s liberation of the 70s as well as more recently LGBT rights.
 
What she later said was that in 2019 busing was a measure that should  be used but she fell short of committing to federally mandated busing in 2019. 

[BundouYMB]

It's hard to call Kamala's attack on Biden anything other than opportunistic considering SHE AGREES WITH HIM. But yes, civil rights are important.

Kamala agrees with him today, but disagrees with where he stood in the seventies. How hard is that to comprehend that circumstances have changed four decades later? He also constantly misstates where he stood in the seventies, according to fact checkers.

Biden hasn't changed his position.  She agrees with where he stood in the 70s.

No, you are confused, they clearly don’t agree on what was necessary in the 70-80s. She asked him specifically “ do you agree TODAY that you were wrong to oppose federally mandated busing back THEN?”. He first said he never opposed busing ( untrue) then made the argument that it should be left up to the local government which was basically the argument of pro segregationist at the time and marks him as being in direct opposition to the civil rights movement. Her argument was that the involvement of the federal government was necessary in red states not only in relation to central issues to the civil rights movement in the 60 and 70s such as busing but also to the women’s liberation of the 70s as well as more recently LGBT rights.
 
What she later said was that in 2019 busing was a measure that should  be used but she fell short of committing to federally mandated busing in 2019. 

The level of historical illiteracy here is astounding. Busing was a failed policy! It was phased out with support from across the political spectrum - including from civil rights activists. Yes, Biden opposed it from the beginning. History proved his position correct.

Harris claimed to support busing during the debate and then flip-flopped. Harris said after the debate she supported busing where individual communities deemed it appropriate at the local level - if you have any understanding of busing whatsoever then you know that defeats the entire purpose of busing! White communities never would have consented to have black students bused to their school district.

You're clearly the one who's confused here.

[Rookie Yinzer]

The level of historical illiteracy here is astounding. Busing was a failed policy! It was phased out with support from across the political spectrum - including from civil rights activists. Yes, Biden opposed it from the beginning. History proved his position correct.

Harris claimed to support busing during the debate and then flip-flopped. Harris said after the debate she supported busing where individual communities deemed it appropriate at the local level - if you have any understanding of busing whatsoever then you know that defeats the entire purpose of busing! White communities never would have consented to have black students bused to their school district.

You're clearly the one who's confused here.

I agree that busing was failed but she said she said it was necessary to combat de jure segregation (which was the case in the 60s and 70s) not de facto segregation (what we have now- schools are more segregated now then they were in 1968). She's done a terrible job of making that distinction or maybe she's just making the choice to leave it alone because she doesn't want to make her campaign about Biden or because most people wouldn't understand the nuance without calling her a flip flopper.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

The level of historical illiteracy here is astounding. Busing was a failed policy! It was phased out with support from across the political spectrum - including from civil rights activists. Yes, Biden opposed it from the beginning. History proved his position correct.

Harris claimed to support busing during the debate and then flip-flopped. Harris said after the debate she supported busing where individual communities deemed it appropriate at the local level - if you have any understanding of busing whatsoever then you know that defeats the entire purpose of busing! White communities never would have consented to have black students bused to their school district.

You're clearly the one who's confused here.

I agree that busing was failed but she said she said it was necessary to combat de jure segregation (which was the case in the 60s and 70s) not de facto segregation (what we have now- schools are more segregated now then they were in 1968). She's done a terrible job of making that distinction or maybe she's just making the choice to leave it alone because she doesn't want to make her campaign about Biden or because most people wouldn't understand the nuance without calling her a flip flopper.

But there *wasn’t* de jure segregation in the 1970s. That ended in 1954, after that it was all de facto - you had all-white schools and all-black schools because the patterns institutionalized by de jure segregation were still there, but there was nothing that legally forced kids into certain schools by race  by the time busing became a national issue. It’s the same situation we’re in now.

[Rookie Yinzer]

The level of historical illiteracy here is astounding. Busing was a failed policy! It was phased out with support from across the political spectrum - including from civil rights activists. Yes, Biden opposed it from the beginning. History proved his position correct.

Harris claimed to support busing during the debate and then flip-flopped. Harris said after the debate she supported busing where individual communities deemed it appropriate at the local level - if you have any understanding of busing whatsoever then you know that defeats the entire purpose of busing! White communities never would have consented to have black students bused to their school district.

You're clearly the one who's confused here.

I agree that busing was failed but she said she said it was necessary to combat de jure segregation (which was the case in the 60s and 70s) not de facto segregation (what we have now- schools are more segregated now then they were in 1968). She's done a terrible job of making that distinction or maybe she's just making the choice to leave it alone because she doesn't want to make her campaign about Biden or because most people wouldn't understand the nuance without calling her a flip flopper.

But there *wasn’t* de jure segregation in the 1970s. That ended in 1954, after that it was all de facto - you had all-white schools and all-black schools because the patterns institutionalized by de jure segregation were still there, but there was nothing that legally forced kids into certain schools by race  by the time busing became a national issue. It’s the same situation we’re in now.

You're right! I'm parroting what Harris said immediately after the debate lol but yeah her handling of explaining why she is also against it was horrible. I've personally ignored talking about it because I think it's a no-win situation for her no matter how she spins it. She scored a few points on Biden in that moment but it's not something to be debated long term. Let's see what Biden says or does about it!