I really don't see it that way. Hard to say how Republicans will respond, but my guess would be that 4 years of a "normal" Biden presidency will likely force the GOP back to the center, or risk of really blowing up the party for good.
I get that Biden isn't your bag, politically, but I would guess that the majority of US voters would be quite content with both parties closer to the middle.
It has nothing to do with what I think of Biden politically. Having a president who exudes proper decorum will mean jack#### to people if they still can't find meaningful, well-paying jobs and affordable housing and health care.
I doubt there is anyone of consequence who fails to recognize that this election is a referendum on Trump.
A hard progressive candidate would have complicated things. It would be a referendum of taking a socialism turn and referendum on Trump and would leave a lot of people having to decide which is the lesser evil.
It has nothing to do with what I think of Biden politically. Having a president who exudes proper decorum will mean jack#### to people if they still can't find meaningful, well-paying jobs and affordable housing and health care.
Those are just end results you are mentioning. Just because someone promises to give all those things, doesn't mean they can make it happen and have a plan for dealing with the expenses and consequences giving everyone those things.
A hard progressive candidate would have complicated things. It would be a referendum of taking a socialism turn and referendum on Trump and would leave a lot of people having to decide which is the lesser evil.
I think after the COVID fiasco and Trump's response to the protestors, almost any Democratic candidate would have likely beaten him. You might have lost some of the suburban white voters, but that's probably offset by the increase in Latino voters that Bernie carried.
It likely would be closer than it is is now, and it likely means that Arizona, North Carolina, and possibly Florida are out of play, but if you shave off even 5% of Biden's popular (RCP average has it at Biden +9.4), Bernie probably would have still had enough to carry the rust belt States and seal a win.
If you think the Democrats should go full-court progressive under Biden, that will be handing things back to the Republicans.
Rather than going full-court progressive, I think they should go full-court on anti-corruption legislation, getting money out of politics and strengthening democratic institutions. That would be a true bipartisan position on behalf of the populace. It would be hard to make happen, but a worthy goal.
__________________
"If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?"
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to JohnnyB For This Useful Post:
I've posted it before, but if the Democrats go back to the neoliberal policies of the Obama and Clinton administrations, and do nothing to solve the rampant inequality in the country and the entrenched corporate aristocracy/oligarchy, we're going to be right back here in 4-8 years with another (likely worse) version of Trump.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
It has nothing to do with what I think of Biden politically. Having a president who exudes proper decorum will mean jack#### to people if they still can't find meaningful, well-paying jobs and affordable housing and health care.
My post wasn't about decorum, but more on where on the spectrum the Dems end up, mostly in response to your earlier post. Assuming Biden's administration is basically the same as Obama/Clinton, I don't see the response is a worse Trump. I see inequality as a massive issue as well, but it doesn't mean the majority of voters seek a big shift left for the Dems as the answer (and doesn't say anything about how the Republicans shift policy).
__________________
From HFBoard oiler fan, in analyzing MacT's management:
O.K. there has been a lot of talk on whether or not MacTavish has actually done a good job for us, most fans on this board are very basic in their analysis and I feel would change their opinion entirely if the team was successful.
Those are just end results you are mentioning. Just because someone promises to give all those things, doesn't mean they can make it happen and have a plan for dealing with the expenses and consequences giving everyone those things.
Agreed. My concern isn't Biden-specific. Any Democratic candidate is going to have to reckon with these things to restore any kind of faith in whatever political wing they're representing.
I think after the COVID fiasco and Trump's response to the protestors, almost any Democratic candidate would have likely beaten him. You might have lost some of the suburban white voters, but that's probably offset by the increase in Latino voters that Bernie carried.
It likely would be closer than it is is now, and it likely means that Arizona, North Carolina, and possibly Florida are out of play, but if you shave off even 5% of Biden's popular (RCP average has it at Biden +9.4), Bernie probably would have still had enough to carry the rust belt States and seal a win.
I'm not saying he wouldn't have won, but there might be a lot of last minute "I can't vote for a socialist" cold feet votes that would go to Trump.
Biden is the better bet, and removing Trump is far more important than anything else right now.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to nfotiu For This Useful Post:
Rather than going full-court progressive, I think they should go full-court on anti-corruption legislation, getting money out of politics and strengthening democratic institutions. That would be a true bipartisan position on behalf of the populace. It would be hard to make happen, but a worthy goal.
Honestly, the #1 thing they need to start doing is going hard after tax evasion, sheltering, shell companies, etc. Repatriate the wealth that is being generated by the American people and start investing it back into the country.
My post wasn't about decorum, but more on where on the spectrum the Dems end up, mostly in response to your earlier post. Assuming Biden's administration is basically the same as Obama/Clinton, I don't see the response is a worse Trump. I see inequality as a massive issue as well, but it doesn't mean the majority of voters seek a big shift left for the Dems as the answer (and doesn't say anything about how the Republicans shift policy).
Well I think there are a few schools of thought when it comes to Trump:
1) He's an aberration and, along with the GOP, the main cause of the issues that plague the U.S.
2) He's the result of 40+ years of both parties sliding to the right economically and the insidiousness of big money in politics.
3) Some kind of mix of the two.
I personally subscribe to option 2 because historically we've seen this before in times of tremendous inequality, and we're seeing it now in other countries (Duterte, Bolsonarro, Erdogan, etc., etc.). IMO, if the U.S. doesn't get its inequality issues in order, history will repeat itself and the consequences will be much worse than they were this time around.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
__________________
From HFBoard oiler fan, in analyzing MacT's management:
O.K. there has been a lot of talk on whether or not MacTavish has actually done a good job for us, most fans on this board are very basic in their analysis and I feel would change their opinion entirely if the team was successful.
Honestly, the #1 thing they need to start doing is going hard after tax evasion, sheltering, shell companies, etc. Repatriate the wealth that is being generated by the American people and start investing it back into the country.
Very hard to go after that money as long as money is continually able to have so much influence on legislation.
__________________
"If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?"
Not remotely what I'm saying. They have 4 years to get the U.S. trending back in the right direction. That means better paying jobs, housing, health care, and infrastructure. Those obviously take more than 4 years to accomplish on a large scale, but there have to at least be incremental improvements that demonstrate the Democrats at least understand the issues and how to fix them.
Agreed. The new Democrat Administration needs to slowly push America in the right direction as you say. But they cannot overreach. If they do, they're going to get hurt (real bad).
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
Not sure he does. It's fun to #### all over Biden, especially when you're a jilted Bernie Bros, but Biden is doing exactly what he should be doing; staying out of the way. Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake. Napoleon was a pretty good field general and understood this strategy. Biden, who was a gaffe machine for much of his political life, learned his lessons under Obama and has displayed a pretty impressive amount of message discipline and not get dragged into a knife fight.
On the policy argument, you can't make incredibly large swings in policy, otherwise the country will fall apart. You have to take small bites and work the process to shift norms back toward the center. Hell, getting them right of the extreme libertarian perspective would be a first step. Getting back to the center where the parties work together is likely a process that will take a generation. This is Biden's mission. Begin the shift. And the best way to do that is to allow Trump and the bat#### crazy Republicans to give you the White House, the Senate, and the House. Let them shoot themselves in the head, then walk up, dig the keys and their wallet out of the cold dead hands, and begin to implement policies and mechanisms that entrench the shift in governance. That would not have happened under anyone else, because they would have been viewed as an extremist candidate and not trusted.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
The only reason Biden is staying out of the way is because he can't put together a complete sentence without making a fool of himself. He is clearly being handled.
Any coherent candidate that could speak well and has no problem being in front of the press (hello Obama) wouldn't need to 'stay out of the way.'
Sometimes I really wonder if you believe half the stuff you post.
There is way too much at stake for a Presidential candidate to 'stay out of the way' and hope my opponent hands me the election.
But not only is Biden quiet, who you think cannot complete a sentence, Harris is quiet too. She's actually the more dangerous, over-reaching one. Biden will being American back to middle ground, Harris would blow it up and hand it back to the Republicans.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
