Here it is - Biden delivers Sanders campaign slogan as the cap to this one minute ad:
1 Like
Oh my God!!!
Apparently Trump not only attacks interests of his voter base, he has buddies who put a bounty on US troops in Afghanistan
I will take anyone with a pulse over that traitorous (insert favorite expletive here)
5 Likes
Most of the pro-Biden sentiment I’ve encountered doesn’t even mention Sanders. Among older Democratic voters I know, he was viewed as a bit of a carpetbagger. When they hear the phrase, “Nothing would fundamentally change,” they see that as a relief. It evokes a return to the government we had under Obama (ending the crazy times we’ve experienced since then). They want to bring stability back.
I’ve got elderly relatives the same age as Sanders who referred to him as “that old man.” They expressed concern about his health (because of the shouting), and then he had a heart attack. So, Biden has a track record as a Democrat, was VP to Obama, and seems to be in better physical shape than Trump or Sanders. Where is the lie/“great manipulation” in that?
7 Likes
Well we could go on about Biden’s signals of cognitive decline - Trump is all over TV doing it right now. Certainly everyone is entitled to their opinions on the candidates status, but Sanders has always been sharp and present, he came back from the heart attack strong and more active than ever. Meanwhile Biden fails to recall things while speaking in public, and apparently disappeared from the campaign while Sanders continued to make policy statements. But we can go on arguing about who is more fit - it does not matter - it was a done deal. But clearly sowing doubts about Sanders health was a component of the lies and manipulation.
What can be clarified from this is the Context of Biden’s statement that “Nothing would fundamentally change”. This was said to a room full of wealthy donors afraid of taxes from a social support effort such as proposed by Sanders. It was not said in a room full of Seniors to encourage them that we would be going back to normalcy. Again - you are free to think whatever you want, but the intent of the statement in that context is clear: Biden would not expand social programs by taxing the people in the room.
Thank you for your spot on imitation of “Captain Obvious.”
Dems suck; Repubs suck and blow while fucking everyone who isn’t them over, sooner and harder.
You still only have two shitty choices.
6 Likes
A heart attack is not “sowing doubt” or a lie. He had one, and voters factored that into their decision-making.
I’m confident that there’s enough pork and misallocation of funds in the federal budget for funding social programs. Based on your previous statements, you believe candidates (and political parties) lie and manipulate voters to gain support. If that’s true, what makes you so sure they aren’t doing the same to corporate donors?
After the campaign funds are spent, and the candidate is in the office, they can do what they want. It only becomes an issue before the next election. I can imagine a corporate donor making an appointment a year from now to complain about some bill that affects their company’s bottom line. In response to that complaint, the new POTUS says, “You must’ve misunderstood what I meant by fundamentally.”
3 Likes
Characterizing it as a negative when it clearly was not is sowing doubt.
I am not so sure. But the corporate donors hold the purse strings - only Sanders was free of that leash.
Those donors are constantly in contact with their candidates - they expect access and favorable law-making.
Democrats misrepresent to constituents to gain their votes, while going on to enact policies against their interest
It is worth considering these two statements together. Which set of constituents is he misleading? Especially since in the year since that statement to some donors he has brought a bunch of Sanders supporters into his staff, has elevated the role of Symone Sanders (who was on Bernie’s campaign in 2016 but apparently decided Joe was a better fit), and has explicitly changed his stand on issues such as the Green New Deal. Biden is famous for changing his positions on things, and usually when he does he becomes a true believer. For example, he was opposed to the ACA, but after Obama persuaded him to support it he became the guy who twisted all the arms in the legislature to get it passed. Our job is to make sure that the changes are in the right direction.
Biden’s policy positions are on his website, and while they don’t represent the kind of revolution Bernie was supporting, they are a step forward even from the last time he was in office.
Well we could go on about Biden’s signals of cognitive decline
Sure, if you want to carry water for Putin and Murdoch. His recent appearances make it pretty clear that this is bullshit.
4 Likes
Absolutely.
The middle class (who dominate the primaries to an even greater extent than the general) will reliably vote in defence of the status quo; their primary motivation usually appears to be the protection of their own privilege.
White supremacy and classist exploitation are maintained by the consent of the middle class.
1 Like
I must clarify first quote under my user name was not my statement, but from the linked article.
I respect making changes to positions over time. I suggest Joe take up Medicare for All.
Really!? He just blubbered through another statement last week, mis-quoting covid deaths, which was all over the press. He’s old, and not as sharp as he used to be - face it. And the man has all the poor politically incorrect reflexes of most old white men. Sorry, I refuse to overlook these flaws. But my criticism of the weaknesses of this candidate is not equivalence to support for Trump or his evil friends.
More quotes from the “Nothing will Change” talk:
Biden went on to say that the rich should not be blamed for income inequality, pleading to the donors, “I need you very badly.”
“I hope if I win this nomination, I won’t let you down. I promise you,” he added.
again we have yet to see a retraction of this in words or deeds - not coming across as a champion of the people here, more of a champion of The Money.
But it is exactly the point you were trying to make, that you think he is planning to cater to the rich donors to whom he was speaking.
Really!? He just blubbered through another statement last week, mis-quoting covid deaths
You mean using “million” instead of “thousand”, which by the way he immediately corrected? Only the Murdoch media thinks this is a “gaffe” worth mentioning, but even they admit it is a nonissue:
His full quote was: “Now we have over 120 million dead from COVID, I mean, 120,000 dead from COVID.
I’ve been watching all his stumping, and while he might not be as sharp as he was 30 years ago, that is not necessarily a bad thing: he was an asshole 30 years ago. He has been doing a solid, competent job, at times even on fire.
we have yet to see a retraction of this in words or deeds
Unless you count all the policy statements he has made since, and the additions of progressives to his advisory staff, as a retraction.
4 Likes
I agree that his (well staged) ads show him at his best. I am not saying he is senile, but trump is plastering these gaffs all over his ads. I get TV from a battleground state, and trump is hammering him.
I do not count that. He needs to break with monied supporters as a moral position to work for the people. There are many ways to do this - “We are sorry that your taxes will rise, but you can rest assured you will help rebuild the society and nation that trump has nearly destroyed”.
Biden alone can change the trajectory of the DNC by rejecting these past allegencies, as Sanders has done. Now is a unique time when this is possible. The money likely does not matter. Trump has shit his own bed, and can go down, without needing to suckle the rich and owe them favors. Any big thinker would see this and take advantage.
That you state a heart attack is not viewed as a negative by voters in a US presidential election cycle ignores the lessons of history. There’s a reason why voters make a big deal over the medical reports and physical fitness of candidates. Anything that makes a candidate look less than perfectly healthy can cost them an election. If it wasn’t important to voters, 45 wouldn’t spend so much time and effort trying to convince the public that he’s in “very good health.”
We learn about the Kennedy/Nixon debates in school. In September 2016, the media coverage was all over Hillary Clinton’s fainting spell/stumble. They raised doubts about Dick Cheney as a VP candidate because of his cardiac history. The holder of that office is commonly described as being “a heartbeat away from the presidency.” There’s no way a heart attack is a non-issue or a positive for a candidate running for the presidency.
1 Like
1 Like
Then your definition of “words and deeds” is quite a lot narrower than mine. I think adopting policy proposals in your campaign, both on the website and in your stump speeches, counts as “words”, and that hiring people with progressive track record to be your advisors counts as “deeds”. Anything stronger than that will have to come in the form of actions once he is actually in office.
He needs to break with monied supporters as a moral position to work for the people.
Most successful politicians understand that in our political system you need to take money wherever you can get it in order to get or stay in office and work for the people.
3 Likes
Shhh! Whatever you do, don’t let the POTUS see this…he’d love to have that kind of constant coverage (and number of terms). We’d wind up thinking fondly of his tweets as the “good old days.”
1 Like
I did not state that. I said that the outcome of his heart attack clearly was positive, and that characterizing it as negative was sowing doubts. What voters think is influenced by what people campaigning for Biden say, and spinning a negative story about Sanders heart attack constitutes the kind of bad faith coercion of voters that I am describing. By comparison Sanders never questioned Biden’s mental state, even when Biden made ridiculous statements during their last debate.
Not at all. Biden has not adopted the strongest social programs that Sanders has advocated for, namely Medicare for All. Nor has he spoken directly to progressives to say he has or will adopt these positions. He has not strayed far from Centrist positions, and certainly has done nothing that will threaten corporations or wealthy donors.
I think its been comprehensively proven that this is in fact not needed, and we all know it is the root of almost all corruption in our system. It seems a no-brainer to ditch it at a time like this. Yet Biden has not.
