posted
I realize that the majority around here supported Joe Biden's candidacy, likely in great part that passenger rail would fair better than it would in a second Trump term.
But, let's be honest. It's all over.
How he and his Administration can survive this Afghanistan debacle escapes me; Saigon '75 was "orderly" in comparison with this "retreat".
We all know that Gerry Ford only served a partial term and was not reelected; Joe has been mortally wounded by the ineptness of the intelligence regarding Kabul to such extent that I can only foresee his resignation, or removal under the 25th Amendment (impeachment; not likely).
Kamala is "simply not up to the job" beyond that of a caretaker.
There goes the infrastructure legislation - and all the "goodies" within it for passenger rail; Congress will be in Republican hands after the '22 mid-terms. There goes the hopes of any Democrat for '24. Liz, Bernie, or other sacrificial lamb may as well as run - and get the floor mopped up with them by whomever the Republicans nominate (Trump is not a sure bet; I'd be thinking DeSantis, Scott, or Cruz).
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is additional commentary from the "non-partisan but not neutral" Daily Beast:
Fair Use:
Courtesy MSN.
But being the right candidate to beat Trump did not make Biden the right candidate to actually become president. If this wasn’t already clear, it is now. The hopes and dreams of a Biden presidency that would remake America are beginning to crumble. Talks of being the next FDR now seem naive and hubristic. Indeed, my warnings about aspiring to be LBJ suddenly look eerily prophetic (be careful what you wish for). Trump’s evil insanity made many people cling to the hope that Biden would be some “Jesus meets JFK” savior, as opposed to a predictable rebound relationship.
I can only reiterate; a "miracle" if Joe completes the term. I have held that Joe would hang on until the new Republican controlled Congress was sworn in; now I take that back and am thinking along the lines of "after the Holidays", or early '22.
I can't be sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if Kamala has been told to get her team together.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Looks like the fact that this is an illegitimate administration is starting to be exposed. That is, if the "cancel culture" behind it didn't tip anyone off.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am more concerned about the California Governors recall. California is so heavily Democratic that the only way a Republican can win is to unseat him in a recall. If that happens, pray for Diane Feinstein, who is 88. If she passes suddenly, the new Republican Governor will replace her with a Republican. The GOP regains the majority y, Mitch McConnell again leads the Senate,and the Democratic agenda is lost.
Posts: 516 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Helfner, I don't think the issue here is whether the government is legitimate or, as some factions contend, otherwise.
The issue is that whoever was making the call made one of the greatest blunders of the entire "postwar" era.
This was a blunder, be it from faulty intelligence or the unwillingness of the decision maker, i.e. Joe, to abide by such, for which accountability must be accepted. Joe's presidency is mortally wounded, and should step down at such time an orderly transition to a "caretaker" administration can be formed by VP Harris. Such an administration would enact the annual "Spending" and Defense Bills, give the fight back order if attacked, dispatch Federal Aid to natural disasters, and "pardon" the turkeys,
As Mr. Nicholson immediately notes, any legislative initiatives away from the annual Spending bill, including the infrastructure with its $66B allocated to passenger rail, are going nowhere under the Harris successor administration.
The voters have ample time to decide which direction they "want things to go". All I can hope for is that the '24 Election be sufficiently decisive ('22 Midterms decided as soon as Joe, with the razor thin Dem majority, took office) so that there need be no question held by some factions arising from that during '20 and it results in a unified way to move forward.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Or it could have been deliberate, which is scarier to contemplate. That's one thing I actually do not hold Joseph Robinette Jr. 100% responsible for, even though he did insist that the buck stops with him.
The more I learn about the left, the more I realize how implacable they are, and how the end truly justifies the means for them. Only with such realization do tragedies such as this one make sense somewhat.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jerome Nicholson: I am more concerned about the California Governors recall. California is so heavily Democratic that the only way a Republican can win is to unseat him in a recall. If that happens, pray for Diane Feinstein, who is 88. If she corals, the new Republican Governor will replace her with a Republican. The GOP regains the majority y, Mitch McConnell again leads the Senate,and the Democratic agenda is lost.
From what I've seen of their agenda, it consists of making the USA fall as a sovereign nation in a maelstrom of violence, so the quicker it's lost, the better.
BTW, lest anyone think I'm putting faith in the fake opposition, the GOP's agenda is identical to the Democrats and has been for over six decades. We are under one-party rule.
PS. Your lack of empathy for thousands of Americans now trapped in a newly-spawned enemy state ruled by an implacable, murderous enemy who won't stop with just Afghanistan is noted.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Im puzzled why Mr. Helfner would infer that I have no empathy for the Americans (and the Afghans) stranded when no one on this message board mentioned them in this discussion. I would have thought that went without saying! As Mr. Norman notes, this operation has been a blunder,though at this writing it seems to be going more smoothly. But it must be remembered which President negotiated the withdrawal that amounted to a surrender.Whose Sec of State posed for a picture with the leader of this implacable, murderous enemy that the President at the time wanted to have as a guest at Camp David, and which President wanted to complete the handover in May. Yes, Biden wants us out too, but at least he wanted more time. I know this is a sh*tshow, but at least Biden is taking responsibility like a real man and a President should. As for Biden being "illegitimate", it should be noted that he won by the rules set down by the founders, just like his predecessors who I didnt like, such as GWBush and Trump. When they won, those of my political bent didnt try to overturn the government by illegal, violent means., Whoevers side you are on, however you feel about the results of an election, there is NO EXCUSE for trying to overturn an election by force. Finally, Mr. Helfner, if you think the GOP's agenda is identical to the Democrats', look at what the Democrats are trying to get through Congress compared towhat the GOP did last time THEY had one party rule. A tax cut for billionaires, and TRIED to take away healthcare from millions of Americans.
Posts: 516 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
You underestimate Biden's tenacity that can come from having experienced personal travesty. Of all the President's, I can only think of Lincoln's example. Biden might say one term is enough, given his age,but I doubt he will quit mid term unless he has a serious illness.
Posts: 516 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Nicholson, I realize this clip is taken from Fox News and in all likelihood has been "curated" (seems to be a new buzzword) to further their agenda, there is enough within such to show that Joe has kind of "lost it".
At this time, we need a "post 9/11, pre-Iraq, GWB hand on the throttle" and I'm afraid, despite Joe's most sincere efforts, we haven't got such at this time.
I can only hope at this time, Kamala is assembling her team (and that Joe's can accept the "boot" is how the game is played), because I think it is "touch and go" if Joe can even make it to Xmas.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ah, yes ,GWBush. A truly illegitimate President who was not elected but selected by the Supreme Court when they ruled not to count all the votes in Florida. Certainly Al Gore would have been justified in leading an insurrection against the Capitol. But he didn't, and we didn't because we still respected the rule of law. GWBush, who didn't act on the August 2001 memo warning of an attack on the USA and who broke off the hunt for bin Laden to invade Iraq on false pretenses. What a role model!
Posts: 516 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Nicholson, yes it was true that at the time the Y2K recount was called off and Gore conceded, the difference was 537 votes in favor of GWB. However, it was determined that whatever absentee votes there were uncounted were largely from military members over or at sea - and the military always favors the Republican candidate.
So it was a case of "end the nightmare"; little did we know of the nightmare to come twenty years later.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The "Bookies" note that there is a 41% chance that Joe will leave office before his term expires - and essentially zip he will seek another.
Times columnists, who represent differing sides of the political spectrum, are also questioning his ability to "survive".
He will hang on to Xmas and a little after; maybe his resignation announcement will be part of his SOTU.
Incidentially, while only my word is evidence of such today, I shared over lunch in Saigon during Oct '67 with two of my "Buds" that LBJ would not run again. I could see, with three months "in-country", just how apathetic too many Vietnamese were about the war. If I sensed it, LBJ had to know it.
I also shared same with my Mother and Father in a letter that they had prior to LBJ's announcement.
Now with this noted, I can't see how Joe can survive.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
As someone who was amazed that Biden won in the first place, and who considered him obviously totally unqualified for the job from the get-go, and whose ineptitude was exceeded by that of his choice of VP, I am still astounded by the absolute complete chaos of his debacle in Afghanistan. If ever we have had a "leader" who has ever been worse than that we have now, I do not who comes even close.
Can anything be more disgusting than to walk away from citizens and those we employed like has been done now? If the President and all military leadership involved were to resign right now it would be too late. To say that they have blood on their hands is just the start.
As said, it makes our pull out from Saigon look orderly. While there (in a construction unit) I had several Vietnamese working for me and a Vietnamese army sergeant that was with me from time to time as an interpreter. Did any of these survive the North's takeover? Probably not. They would not have been high up enough on the totem pole to get out easily. As to the Afgani's and the Vietnamese Army's lack of enthusiasm, it was very plain that the US was going to leave them hanging out to dry. This can now be regarded as the second time in recent years that we have jerked defeat out of the jaws of victory.
The only thing that makes Biden's continued stay in office look at all likely and the least bit desirable is to look at the order of succession. I don't see anyone that I would consider better. Frankly by now looking at him in action he acts totally non compos doing only what he is told.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here are those in order of succession with names: President: joe Biden and then we go to: 1. Vice President – Kamala Harris 2. Speaker of the House – Nancy Pelosi 3. President Pro Tempore of the Senate – Patrick Leahy 4. Secretary of State – Antony Blinken 5. Secretary of the Treasury – Janet Yellen 6. Secretary of Defense – Lloyd Austin 7. Attorney General – Merrick Garland 8. Secretary of the Interior – Deb Haaland 9. Secretary of Agriculture – Tom Vilsack 10. Secretary of Commerce – Gina Raimondo 11. Secretary of Labor – Marty Walsh 12. Secretary of Health and Human Services – Xavier Becerra 13. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development – Marcia Fudge 14. Secretary of Transportation – Pete Buttigieg 15. Secretary of Energy – Jennifer Granholm 16. Secretary of Education – Miguel Cardona 17. Secretary of Veterans Affairs – Denis McDonough 18. Secretary of Homeland Security – Alejandro Mayorkas
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you Mr. Harris for adding your thoughts to this discussion. I also appreciate your compilation of the line of succession - especially that you note with 4th in line Senate President "for the time being" is now Sen. Leahy (D-VT) whereas I thought such was Sen. Grassley (R-IA). Apparently such changes with the majority party.
Now the Amtrak advocacy community would simply "love it" if the first thirteen declined to serve so that "Amtrak Pete" sat in the Oval.
But now returning to the intent of this topic, I of course have become horribly disillusioned with Joe and, like Mr. Harris, question his present competence to hold the job.
While I wish that both parties had it within themselves to have selected other candidates (let's not look at me for suggestions, as I thought Joe should have stepped aside in favor of Andy), I voted for Joe on the strength that he would be a "caretaker bring us together" president.
Of course he should have enacted legislation to provide relief to those adversely affected by COVID. I'm not sure about the "Stimulus" checks enacted by both Trump and Joe; which resulted in me owing to a one time drop in my '19 income (had to sell two positions at a loss) becoming eligible for such (I donated all to Feeding America). Those funds should have been packed into further enhancement of Unemployment benefits "capped" at a beneficiary's previous earnings level. At least there, the beneficiaries have "worked for it" while they could.
Now so far as the Infrastructure legislation, which could well now become a DOA, I'm all in favor of fixing bridges and highways, plus Broadband where underserved - oh, and for the audience here, the Gateway tunnels, but that should be "IT". Using infrastructure and COVID as a "cover" to propose sweeping "New Deal" and "Great Society" legislation is not what I voted for with Joe.
And now, Afghanistan; foreign policy was supposed to be Joe's strong suit. If he relied upon faulty intelligence, he owns that. Those agencies all work for him - not Congress or the Judiciary. If the apparent "deal" Trump struck with the Taliban, appeared too "one sided", that is where his skill in foreign relations was to have shone to have such modified to enable an orderly withdrawal and transition to Taliban rule. There was simply no point to support an armed force that wouldn't fight and a government that fled (or literally "desertion in the face of the enemy" - for which Messrs. Harris, Ocala Mike, Pullman, surely others here who have worn the uniform, and I, would have been looking at the Gallows).
I really think Joe will not complete the term; Kamala would only be a caretaker. "Pardoning the turkeys" would be a high point of her Administration.
Let's hope that both parties can improve upon their choices for '24 than they did for '20.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anybody notice that while Biden, et al were at Ground Zero masked up even though vaccinated and outdoors, where Trump was? He was meeting with groups of Firemen and Policemen, or whatever the sexually neutral term is these days, having an enthusiastic reception. By the way, all were maskless.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not surprisingly, Maureen Dowd in her Sunday Times column found other matters on how the former president spent 9/11 to address:
Fair Use:
Never one to miss a cheesy tableau of machismo, Trump is providing ringside commentary on a boxing match on 9/11 at the Hard Rock Casino in Florida between Evander Holyfield, 58, and Vitor Belfort, 44. During a promotional event for the Hasbeenpalooza, the 75-year-old bragged that he’d like to beat up the 78-year-old Joe Biden in the ring, that it would be his “easiest fight” and that Biden would “go down within the first few seconds.”
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
A further thought; the recall initiative against California Governor Newsom.
Joe has put himself "on the line" campaining for Gov. Newsom's retention today. Early consensus is that Gov. Newsom will be retained, but "it's not in the bag".
If retention prevails, then I guess Joe could proclaim a "victory". But should Gov. Newsom be removed from office, it only will enhance the thought I hold "it's all over" come roundly next January, or four months from today. Joe would find himself "radioactive" around any Democratic candidate is a close Mid-Term election. Not that Kamala could be all that effective, but best have Joe gone before the campaigns begin.
addendum: just as well that Gov. Newsom has prevailed. While he is "not exactly a man of the people" as this Journal columnist points out, the matter of his qualifications to serve as Governor will be taken up by the people - at the polls during November '22.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was not really surprised that Newsom prevailed. But, neither would I disagree with the cartoon that showed him in front of a U-Haul place labeled as "Salesman of the Month". I do have the feeling that he outspent his opponents by about a factor of four to one had a lot to do with it.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It appears that "next crisis at bat" for Joe is this ongoing "fruck fruck" with France.
Now I can't be sure where the French "thought they're coming from". That Australia was going to buy submarines from them with WWII technology? Come on Froggies.
If the US considers Australia a sufficiently trusted ally to share with them sub technology that is the most advanced in the world, of course that is where they will go - and the shipping lanes through SE Asia will be all the safer from hostile foreign powers.
It's simply a "win-win" for the US and Australia. "Sorry bout that, France".
Now what remains is what kind of goods can Australia buy from France to make up that $66B shortfall? Now if Joe still has his supposedly strong foreign policy skills (Afghanistan has me wondering), now would be a time to put them on the table.
How about an HSR system along their East coast from Brisbane to Melbourne via Sydney and Canberra? Even though I've scrubbed any thoughts of going down there next year (I probably could get in, COVID notwithstanding, with a dual citizen permanent resident Niece residing near Sydney), the present US$21,000 air fare is, uh, "a bit of a turn off".
But with the reports that "Amtrak smells like a rose" when compared with their inter city trains (except the Luxotrains), I think that is an area in which the shortfall could be recovered.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
There was an article in he Atlantic some time back that stated that Joe had managed to be on the wrong side of almost all foreign policy decisions throughout his entire political life. It surprised me that they published it considering their usual political perspective. The Aussie sub decision I have to say I consider Joe's best decision as president. The French can get over it, and so can the Chinese. That Joe did something that made the Chinese unhappy surprises me far more than him making the French unhappy.
Some things I have read indicate that cost overruns and reneging on promises of work on these to be done in Australia had much to do with the Aussies telling the French to go away on this issue. Getting far better technology certainly made this a near "no brainer" decision. I don't see the need for the Aussies to do anything to placate France.
That the Kiwi's "nothing nuclear allowed in our nation or waters" policy has led them to say these new subs will be unwelcome in New Zealand waters: Well, tough stuff. Wonder what would happen if NZ ever felt themselves threatened militarily? Bet they would forget all about this posturing.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It isn't just the French that got unhappy, but all of the EU kakistocrats and their supporting national politicians. They were even moved to compare Biden with his predecessor (inaccurately).
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by irishchieftain: It isn't just the French that got unhappy, but all of the EU kakistocrats and their supporting national politicians. They were even moved to compare Biden with his predecessor (inaccurately).
Cry me a river. They didn't like Trump because he had backbone and stood up to them and they simply have no respect for Biden because of his obvious incompetence. My main experience working with Europeans, with few exceptions, is their overwhelming arrogance. It is not altogether a joke that working with Europeans helps me understand why my ancestors got on little wooden boats and risked drowning to leave. We owe these people nothing. In fact, my understanding is that that France, for one, has not paid debts to the US going back to WW1.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I voted for Joe simply on the strength that he was to have a one term, "caretaker", "bring us together" presidency. I believed that he would be a "centrist" governing much as did both Carter and Clinton. Instead of being "enemies", Joe (from WV) and Kyrsten (from AZ) would have been allies.
Instead, Joe takes orders from Bernie, Liz, and The Squad - something I never envisioned. To seek "hard" infrastructure rebuilding within the traditional sense of the term - bridges, highways, the Gateway Tunnel, and even expanding it to include broadband is what I had in mind. This "human infrastructure" definition is simply "too much".
With Joe's long standing experience on foreign affairs, I could never have envisioned a debacle like Afghanistan occurring on his watch.
At this time, I'm not sure if even the "hard" infrastructure will be enacted. Bernie, Liz, and "Squad", have done a good job of poisoning that well.
So all told, Joe, I'm disappointed and that is why I have considerable doubts if you will complete your term.
Now I'm hardly about to say "gosh, why didn't I vote for Trump". Be it assured, that was not going to happen for the Presidency the notable scholars have ranked 41st of 44 (the two preceding - Pierce, Buchannan and the one following Lincoln - Johnson -get that booby prize).
I only wish that both parties had found different candidates to nominate during '20. For '24, from the Republicans the likes of Abbott, DeSantis, Scott seem like strong bets. For the Democrats, Booker, Klobouchar, and Manchin could fill the bill. Voters will have had enough of Kamala filling out Joe's unexpired term.
But, AOC (she could run in '24, her birth date is Oct 13, 1989. Therefore she will be 35 on Inauguration Day), Bernie, Donald, and Liz; for the good of your respective parties, stay out.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Biden has always been a committed anti-constitutional leftist and no "moderate" if that word really has meaning. His prior bids for presidential candidacy highlighted several character flaws, putting it mildly (not least his blatant plagiarism of Neil Kinnock's speech).
To contrast the ill will out of the EU provoked by him and seemingly by his predecessor, it is indeed the case that the predecessor firmly and openly called out the EU's wrongdoings and worked firmly and frankly with them; while this year's fiascos were conducted in a skulking, capricious and unforthcoming demeanor, the first such fiasco putting the lives of allies in deadly danger.
Also, everyone please note that there are no ideological differences between the two major political parties. They are both on the left, just with one of them enacting the opposite of its party platform (guess which one)
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wee, it has now been over two months since the Afghanistan debacle and Biden et al are still bumbling along. The guy seems to have more lives than a cat. I usually don't make much of a display of my political views, but I am ready to get one of these shirts that says, "Are you sorry yet that you voted for Biden?" I cannot think of one issue on which I think he has made the decision that would be best for the country.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wee, it has now been over two months since the Afghanistan debacle and Biden et al are still bumbling along. The guy seems to have more lives than a cat. I usually don't make much of a display of my political views, but I am ready to get one of these shirts that says, "Are you sorry yet that you voted for Biden?" I cannot think of one issue on which I think he has made the decision that would be best for the country.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Again, as I noted earlier in the topic, I too, being as independent a voter as they come (to date 7R 7D 1I POTUS votes), I only wish both parties had nominated different, and hopefully better, candidates.
I am very disappointed with Joe, citing foremost the Afghanistan blunder that he totally "owns". This is followed by allowing Bernie, Liz, and The Squad to formulate his domestic policy. However, on the other hand, I'm not about to wish I had voted for Trump - ranked 41st of 44 POTUS by the Notable Scholars.
Even if Joe gets "something" out of his "Build..." package (hoping the Senate passed "hard infrastructure" still stands), I still think he will be gone before the term expires. Kamala will only be a caretaker and not be nominated come '24. Trump will be seen for what he is - a Fascist; and too will not be nominated. I give the American people more smarts than the economically depressed Germans who duly elected Hitler to their Parliament (Bundestag, I think they call it), but once there bullied his way to become Chancellor, and from there a dictator.
So both parties best be looking at their benches.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
This Journal columnist, William Galston, holds my views regarding Joe's disappointing presidency. While possibly my view of "he could be gone by Xmas" (OK; the SOTU), is more drastic than he is prepared to share, the presidency has been a disappointment. Those voters that wanted the country to be "molded in the image" of Bernie, Liz, and "The Squad" are disappointed in that "he hasn't delivered". Those voters, like my independent self (7R 7D 1I to date), who wanted a presidency to "lean somewhat left" following Carter's and Clinton's agenda (the two Bush's lean right was also acceptable to me), are also disappointed.
I doubt if any voter can consider his foreign policy to date anything short of disaster. Afghanistan was simply too great a blunder to be in the dustbin by '22, and even to the extent he has "patched things up" with France over the CXD sale of those WWII Submarines to Australia, just cannot override that first blunder - and foreign policy was touted as his strong suit.
Finally, our "Dem leading" membership here need not fear. I'm hardly about to go out and purchase a "Gee, why didn't I vote for Trump" T-Shirt. I simply wish both parties had nominated different candidates.
Here's "Fair Use" from the column:
After nine months in office, Joe Biden is in trouble. His job approval has fallen nearly 10 points from its high last spring, and Americans have downgraded their assessment of his presidential capacities.
It is far too early, however, to write off his administration as a “failed presidency,” as Virginia gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin and other prominent Republicans have begun to do. In recent decades, presidents of both parties—Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama among them—have recovered from dips in their popularity to win re-election. Reagan won in 1984 in a landslide—but his job approval averaged 43% in 1982 and had fallen to 35% by the beginning of 1983, according to Gallup.
Still, there are reasons why Mr. Biden’s popularity has faded. In the early summer, the administration unwisely encouraged the hope that the pandemic would soon end, increasing the psychological impact of the Delta variant. Inflation crept higher, and seems likely to last longer, than many experts predicted. Snarled supply chains created shortages of goods, and the situation may deteriorate as holiday shoppers hit the stores. Illegal crossings at the southern border surged to levels not seen for two decades, and the Biden administration still hasn’t figured out what to do about it. Rates of violent crime, especially murder, have risen, forcing mayors to reverse the changes in policing made in the aftermath of George Floyd’s death.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seldom in the course of American politics has a party with majorities in all three branches of government promised so much and delivered so little. Of course, much of the blame can be placed on the two recalcitrant DINO Senators who should be primaried when they are up for reelection, but Biden himself deserves his share for opposing repeal of the filibuster when he ran for President knowing that is the one thing that would put the Dems on a level playing field.Remember Democrats have only two years to get major things done before Republicans take one part of Congress and stop them. But the Dems are loath to use this weapon, lest the GOP use in when/if they regain power. As if they havent already used it when it suited their needs! How else are the Dems going to protect voting rights? If the new voting restrictions stay in place, it will become very difficult. for them to ever win majorities again And why would most people vote for them after this? Remember all those marches and demonstrations last summer by young people and minorities? They weren't marching for roads and bridges, but for real reform! And what happened? Police reform? A total failure, with both parties unable to reach any kind of agreement. Voting rights? See above. Sensible gun laws? Forget about it!This great coalition moved Heaven and Earth to get Democrats elected, and what do they have to show for it? How can the Party ever get these people to trust them again? The Democratic record at getting things done is abysmal the Republicans are much better at it. but at least the things the Republicans are good at getting done are anathema to most Americans, like tax cuts for the super rich, TRYING to take away people's health care, stopping people from voting. As for foreign policy, the Afghan pullout was done by Trump, who reversed military policy which is that CIVILIANS are taken out first, military last. That said, Biden should have reopened Bagram Air Base and used it for the evacuation of the Afghan assets and helpers and their families, with the civilian airport for the civiliansr Speaking of Trump, it shocks me he is rated 41st out of 44! Was the list made before Januaey 6? Whatever the other Presidents did, to my mind NOTHING is worse than trying to lead a coup detat against the U.S. Government and establish a dictatorship because one cant accept the fact that he lost the election.
Posts: 516 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
I note that you too have become disillusioned with Joe. Defining Bernie's, Liz's, and "The Squad's" agenda as "infrastructure" is taking things too far.
The victory of Mr. Youngkin for Governor of Virginia is "not exactly" a good omen for the Dems come next year.
Maybe not as early as I predicted (this coming Xmas) now that Afghanistan is "off Page 1", but Joe simply will not complete his term, and Kamala, assuming she runs in '24, will be soundly defeated.
All "We The People" can hope is that the Republicans nominate someone other than Trump come '24; for he (Republicans "not exactly" into the girl stuff) will be the 47th POTUS.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
In a tremendous editorial from this past Friday's Times, and written prior to House passing IIJA21 - Infrastructure Improvement and Jobs Act of 2021, the Board notes:
For many voters — especially those who don’t vote regularly — the 2020 election was about removing Mr. Trump from the White House. It was less about policy or ideology. Mr. Biden did not win the Democratic primary because he promised a progressive revolution. There were plenty of other candidates doing that. He captured the nomination — and the presidency — because he promised an exhausted nation a return to sanity, decency and competence. “Nobody elected him to be F.D.R.,” Representative Abigail Spanberger, a moderate Democrat from Virginia, told The Times after Tuesday’s drubbing. “They elected him to be normal and stop the chaos.”
"Victory" (maybe Phyrric) with IIJA21, does not change why I voted for Joe. The Board's position is why.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Now that IIJA21 is enroute to 1600 and Joe's autograph, I guess that will give him a "lift" - approval polls and his personal "demeanor" regarding the job. Turning shovels of dirt while wearing a hard hat just might be enough to want him to hang around - at least past the upcoming SOTU.
An Acela II departure on 1/20/25?; still not holding breath on that one.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Whatever the other Presidents did, to my mind NOTHING is worse than trying to lead a coup d(’é)tat against the U.S. Government and establish a dictatorship …
Well, after having done precisely that, “Brandon” is rapidly reaping the whirlwind, is he not?
Sorry, but I prefer truth over propaganda, especially propaganda presented in argumentum verbosium form.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
Plenty of outlets at which you can become familiar with the vile lyrics.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank NBC sports reporter Kelli Stavast for that, which Colleen Long takes six paragraphs to get to while neglecting to mention her name. Also takes until paragraph 15 to mention similarly vile “vitriol” against other Presidents, and no mention is made of the current “I did that” meme.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Helfner, it's simply a case of whether one disapproves of the job Joe Biden has done to date, as in "moi", or if anyone chooses to expand a simple misunderstanding by a sports reporter into some kind of vulgarity contest.
Much as the 45th POTUS would have liked to "suspend" such for failing to provide his desired result, we have "that Tuesday in November", and that is where in our long standing Democratic society, "We The People" decide at that time who will be our leader for the next four years.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now we’re moving into the territory of “republic versus democracy”, and there is some evidence to prove them to be distinct, apart from the names of the major parties since virtually the beginning of the USA.
quote:What will be the course of this revolution? Above all, it will establish a democratic constitution, and through this, the direct or indirect dominance of the proletariat. …
That is from The Principles of Communism by Friedrich Engels. To what end, though?
quote:In America, where a democratic constitution has already been established, the communists must make the common cause with the party which will turn this constitution against the bourgeoisie and use it in the interests of the proletariat …
Also from TPOC. Engels goes on to name a faction he calls “the agrarian National Reformers”, but clearly the more expedient route to go would have been to subvert the major political parties, and by the early 1900s there were open “progressives” in both major parties, two of whom served succeeding terms as POTUS.
Back to the subject, who is a plain disciple of these forebears. I myself do not believe 81 million “votes” materialized to enable the labeling of any critics as “white supremacists”, for the FBI and DOJ to go after parents at school board meetings, or to turn illegal aliens into millionaires as proposed. Never was part of the job in question.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
