Joe Biden 2020 campaign megathread v2

[Gustaf]

Personally I think there is a distinction between "opposing busing as a failed policy" and "working with the worst racists in the senate to draft anti-busing legislation as one of your top priorities".

Had Biden just voted in favour of an anti-busing bill when it came up I think it would have been much less of an issue, at least to me.

[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. 

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.

Failed who? White people?
https://mobile.twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1145700760233136128
https://mobile.twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1145701257870479360
https://mobile.twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1145701885577453570

[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.

Failed who? White people?
https://mobile.twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1145700760233136128
https://mobile.twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1145701257870479360
https://mobile.twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1145701885577453570

Why did you post a bunch of random tweets that conflate busing with desegregation in general? Busing was one specific policy. The purpose of busing was to end segregation in the school system. The school system is still largely segregated today. Those are facts. I really don't know what else to tell you.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Personally I think there is a distinction between "opposing busing as a failed policy" and "working with the worst racists in the senate to draft anti-busing legislation as one of your top priorities".

Had Biden just voted in favour of an anti-busing bill when it came up I think it would have been much less of an issue, at least to me.

And that's exactly the point Harris was making. Everyone needs to chill the f*** out with re-litigating busing and thinking that somehow it's become an integral part of Harris' agenda. It was an example of Biden's lack of perspective, that's all.

[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.  

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.

Failed who? White people?
https://mobile.twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1145700760233136128
https://mobile.twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1145701257870479360
https://mobile.twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1145701885577453570

Why did you post a bunch of random tweets that conflate busing with desegregation in general? Busing was one specific policy. The purpose of busing was to end segregation in the school system. The school system is still largely segregated today. Those are facts. I really don't know what else to tell you.

So you’re the expert and the person who is a Macarthur genius recipient for her work on desegregation is some “random” who conflate things? Only on atlas...
Here’s her recent article on busing and desegregation  I’d encourage you to read it!
https://mobile.twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1149684124338270208

[Kleine Scheiße]

There were instances where busing did not "work," because it was sometimes applied in hamhanded ways. The prevalence of those cases has been far overblown. The valid criticisms of busing do not include any allowance for white people just being afraid or bigoted. One of the most serious problems with busing is that it created a comfort zone for many white saviors who believed they were doing black kids some kind of lifesaving favor by simply bringing them to white-majority schools.

Busing did not achieve the stated goal of "desegregation" because no one policy is going to solve any problem in and of itself. We have never been truly desegregated, so we can't really judge any policy by that metric. In many respects, we've barely begun that conversation -- specifically because of white fear (which is most often fundamentally racist; and at the very least informed by latent racism). We shouldn't throw away our sense of scope on the broader state of civil rights in the defense of one policy.

At the same time, the basic fact is that busing also "worked." It objectively did much more good for the individuals most directly affected than bad. There were problems because it was a policy and because it was a policy there were problems.

[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.

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..

I think Biden is a bad candidate who has problematic positions. However he is not a flip flopper. The Hyde Amendment is like saying Climate change is a hoax in a Dem Primary. It has to be opposed. Not a debate in a Dem Primary.

Point is Booker is attacking him intentionally & personally to take forward his campaign. Booker has failed so he needs to attack Joe to rescue his sinking campaign & to get to the 3rd debate. Why on earth will a candidate keep saying "I will go after Joe in the debate & so on". It is ridiculous. If you disagree, you make it clear. Don't threaten to attack someone. Booker has seen the bump Harris got & he wants to go after Joe. All these decades, Booker loved Uncle Joe. He loved him for the last year. Now, Booker & Harris look @ the Black vote & Biden's soft support & they want to attack him, weaken him & get the black vote. It has little to do with policy.

Harris is even more of a peculiar case. What is her 1 big policy? 1st it was teacher pay, next it was tax credits. Now, she can't even make 1 of those issues as a big debate in the Dem debate. She attacked Biden on busing & then went on to say she didn't support mandated busing. And Harris in 2016 was claiming Joe as a lifetime example of the ideal politician with an incredible record. Harris invited Biden in the CA convention & was invoking Biden's late son Beau Biden's name time & again & acted like Biden was family. And then he went after Biden on busing (when she had the same stand) & then on Obama's deportation. Harris has flopped 2 times of Private Insurance (1st Debate & before than Townhall). She has little moral conviction & is a good debater & will say anything & will attack anyone to get elected.

[Shadows]

“We are ready to expect the unexpected,” a Biden campaign adviser said. The adviser said the campaign is bracing for attacks from Booker on the crime bill, Harris on busing, De Blasio on trade and workers’ rights, Gillibrand on women’s rights, and from former San Antonio Mayor Julián Castro on the Obama administration’s deportations. “Everyone is looking for their t-shirt moment,” the campaign adviser said, a reference to Harris, whose campaign immediately began selling t-shirts with a picture of her as a young girl waiting for a bus after her exchange with Biden at the first debate.

Uncle Joe vs everyone. Will probably give Biden more sympathy votes. Everyone shouldn't go after Biden.

[Heebie Jeebie]

This right here is why Biden would be a terrible, terrible nominee.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1155572673881288711

[Tintrlvr]

This right here is why Biden would be a terrible, terrible nominee.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1155572673881288711

Cringe. Biden is a disaster waiting to happen. I really hope the voters don't fall for this stupidity in the primary.

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

This right here is why Biden would be a terrible, terrible nominee.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1155572673881288711

This is a half-truth. This election is a referendum on Trump. But it's not just a true or false question where the Democrats can get away with saying "Trump bad, right?"

If they fail to understand why the country voted for Trump in the first place, they will lose this election again.

[Da2017]

This right here is why Biden would be a terrible, terrible nominee.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1155572673881288711

Anyone but him. I'd take Cory Booker over him, but that;s a low bar. Biden is the most out of touch candidate.

[brucejoel99]

This right here is why Biden would be a terrible, terrible nominee.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1155572673881288711

This is a half-truth. This election is a referendum on Trump. But it's not just a true or false question where the Democrats can get away with saying "Trump bad, right?"

If they fail to understand why the country voted for Trump in the first place, they will lose this election again.

This. And Biden, of all people, knows how to campaign to bring back many of the voters who went for Trump into the Democratic fold.

[perdedor]

This right here is why Biden would be a terrible, terrible nominee.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1155572673881288711

This is a half-truth. This election is a referendum on Trump. But it's not just a true or false question where the Democrats can get away with saying "Trump bad, right?"

If they fail to understand why the country voted for Trump in the first place, they will lose this election again.

This. And Biden, of all people, knows how to campaign to bring back many of the voters who went for Trump into the Democratic fold.

How’s that exactly? Trump won 9% of Democrats in 2016, compare this to the 7% of Dems that Romney won in 2012. There isn’t a huge pool of Trump voting Democrats to bring back. The Dems that voted third party/not at all are who the Democratic nominee needs back & Biden is exactly the wrong kind of candidate to do that.

[brucejoel99]

This right here is why Biden would be a terrible, terrible nominee.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1155572673881288711

This is a half-truth. This election is a referendum on Trump. But it's not just a true or false question where the Democrats can get away with saying "Trump bad, right?"

If they fail to understand why the country voted for Trump in the first place, they will lose this election again.

This. And Biden, of all people, knows how to campaign to bring back many of the voters who went for Trump into the Democratic fold.

How’s that exactly? Trump won 9% of Democrats in 2016, compare this to the 7% of Dems that Romney won in 2012. There isn’t a huge pool of Trump voting Democrats to bring back. The Dems that voted third party/not at all are who the Democratic nominee needs back & Biden is exactly the wrong kind of candidate to do that.

Trump won 9% of those voters who'd voted for Obama in 2012, according to the Democracy Fund Voter Study Group, & it's these voters that would absolutely vote for Biden. And while their numbers aren't enormous, their power, as skewed by the Electoral College, is.

[perdedor]

This right here is why Biden would be a terrible, terrible nominee.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1155572673881288711

This is a half-truth. This election is a referendum on Trump. But it's not just a true or false question where the Democrats can get away with saying "Trump bad, right?"

If they fail to understand why the country voted for Trump in the first place, they will lose this election again.

This. And Biden, of all people, knows how to campaign to bring back many of the voters who went for Trump into the Democratic fold.

How’s that exactly? Trump won 9% of Democrats in 2016, compare this to the 7% of Dems that Romney won in 2012. There isn’t a huge pool of Trump voting Democrats to bring back. The Dems that voted third party/not at all are who the Democratic nominee needs back & Biden is exactly the wrong kind of candidate to do that.

Trump won 9% of those voters who'd voted for Obama in 2012, according to the Democracy Fund Voter Study Group, & it's these voters that would absolutely vote for Biden. And while their numbers aren't enormous, their power, as skewed by the Electoral College, is.

I wouldn’t be so optimistic, frustrated Obama voters who jumped ship to Trump probably aren’t super stoked about a pol whose only claim to relevance was 8 years as Obama’s VP.

Even assuming your right, the election was lost because 2 million Democrats in muh blue firewall weren’t inspired to vote for Hillary and stayed home instead. Biden isn’t going to do any better with these voters.

[Roronoa D. Law]

Oh my god how self centered can this forum get. No Hillary did not lose to Trump because of a buch woke far left liberals decided to stay home because Hillary wasn't good enough for them. The world and politics do not revolve around you guys because if it did Bernie would be president and Biden wouldn't be leading this primary.

[brucejoel99]

This right here is why Biden would be a terrible, terrible nominee.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1155572673881288711

This is a half-truth. This election is a referendum on Trump. But it's not just a true or false question where the Democrats can get away with saying "Trump bad, right?"

If they fail to understand why the country voted for Trump in the first place, they will lose this election again.

This. And Biden, of all people, knows how to campaign to bring back many of the voters who went for Trump into the Democratic fold.

How’s that exactly? Trump won 9% of Democrats in 2016, compare this to the 7% of Dems that Romney won in 2012. There isn’t a huge pool of Trump voting Democrats to bring back. The Dems that voted third party/not at all are who the Democratic nominee needs back & Biden is exactly the wrong kind of candidate to do that.

Trump won 9% of those voters who'd voted for Obama in 2012, according to the Democracy Fund Voter Study Group, & it's these voters that would absolutely vote for Biden. And while their numbers aren't enormous, their power, as skewed by the Electoral College, is.

I wouldn’t be so optimistic, frustrated Obama voters who jumped ship to Trump probably aren’t super stoked about a pol whose only claim to relevance was 8 years as Obama’s VP.

Even assuming your right, the election was lost because 2 million Democrats in muh blue firewall weren’t inspired to vote for Hillary and stayed home instead. Biden isn’t going to do any better with these voters.

Whether or not his campaign is able to energize the base & get progressives to vote for Biden isn't an assertion that can be made now, as it's entirely predicated upon how he decides to campaign come general election time, which has (very obviously) yet to occur.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Oh my god how self centered can this forum get. No Hillary did not lose to Trump because of a buch woke far left liberals decided to stay home because Hillary wasn't good enough for them. The world and politics do not revolve around you guys because if it did Bernie would be president and Biden wouldn't be leading this primary.

Literally nobody said that. The data shows the Obama->Did Not Vote cohort was more moderate than the average Clinton 2016 voter. The largest “moderate” bloc in the Democratic Party are black voters. Black people stayed home. There is no reason to believe Biden will bring them out. Obama begged us to come out for Hillary. He TOLD us his legacy was on the line and turnout still nosedived. That also doesn’t account for voter suppression like in WI where their voter ID laws suppressed 200,000 black votes and not much is being done to combat the effects of this in 2020.

ETA: y’all also need to understand that a candidate leading with black voters in a primary says nothing about their GE performance. To win a GE the Democrat needs to turn out low propensity black voters who don’t vote in primaries. Black primary voters are extremely partial to “establishment” and name brand candidates and that’s fine but it doesn’t make them a slam dunk in the General.

[Mr. Morden]

Point is Booker is attacking him intentionally & personally to take forward his campaign. Booker has failed so he needs to attack Joe to rescue his sinking campaign & to get to the 3rd debate.

Booker's already qualified for the 3rd debate now, as of this morning.

[Gustaf]

Oh my god how self centered can this forum get. No Hillary did not lose to Trump because of a buch woke far left liberals decided to stay home because Hillary wasn't good enough for them. The world and politics do not revolve around you guys because if it did Bernie would be president and Biden wouldn't be leading this primary.

Literally nobody said that. The data shows the Obama->Did Not Vote cohort was more moderate than the average Clinton 2016 voter. The largest “moderate” bloc in the Democratic Party are black voters. Black people stayed home. There is no reason to believe Biden will bring them out. Obama begged us to come out for Hillary. He TOLD us his legacy was on the line and turnout still nosedived. That also doesn’t account for voter suppression like in WI where their voter ID laws suppressed 200,000 black votes and not much is being done to combat the effects of this in 2020.

ETA: y’all also need to understand that a candidate leading with black voters in a primary says nothing about their GE performance. To win a GE the Democrat needs to turn out low propensity black voters who don’t vote in primaries. Black primary voters are extremely partial to “establishment” and name brand candidates and that’s fine but it doesn’t make them a slam dunk in the General.

As seen in 2016.

[henster]

Oh my god how self centered can this forum get. No Hillary did not lose to Trump because of a buch woke far left liberals decided to stay home because Hillary wasn't good enough for them. The world and politics do not revolve around you guys because if it did Bernie would be president and Biden wouldn't be leading this primary.

Literally nobody said that. The data shows the Obama->Did Not Vote cohort was more moderate than the average Clinton 2016 voter. The largest “moderate” bloc in the Democratic Party are black voters. Black people stayed home. There is no reason to believe Biden will bring them out. Obama begged us to come out for Hillary. He TOLD us his legacy was on the line and turnout still nosedived. That also doesn’t account for voter suppression like in WI where their voter ID laws suppressed 200,000 black votes and not much is being done to combat the effects of this in 2020.

ETA: y’all also need to understand that a candidate leading with black voters in a primary says nothing about their GE performance. To win a GE the Democrat needs to turn out low propensity black voters who don’t vote in primaries. Black primary voters are extremely partial to “establishment” and name brand candidates and that’s fine but it doesn’t make them a slam dunk in the General.

As seen in 2016.

Hillary was solid with older blacks like Biden is now but her weakness with younger black voters was evident and Biden seems to have the same problem.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Biden was having problems with blk voters, but it has seemed to dissapate, as voters go to the polls, Biden seems the more electable to beat Trump.

[Orwell]

I think Biden is going pretty hard into Florida which is a pretty good idea if you'd ask me, Bernie only got 33% in 2016 there and if he can prevent anyone else from getting 15% that's 200+ delegates that he'd get.

[Donald Trump’s Toupée]

If he even survives tonight, good luck to him bc tonight has been brutal.