Last edited Sun Apr 28, 2019, 08:37 PM - Edit history (1)

....yielding positive results, he's leading in just about every poll that has been released. More people like his positions than those of other candidates.

No doubt Joe has learned from the last two primary elections he lost to be the Democratic nominee... I expect that experience should only make him a stronger candidate on this, Joe's third try.

He certainly has done well in the polls so far and, using Joe as the standard, it's also going well for Bernie.

May the best candidate win... and vote blue, no matter who!!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

....since there was a hint that Biden was going to formally announce his candidacy aren't "vetting" him, they're beating him down.

Better have the thickest of skin.

As progressives, why so many us are supporting a candidate who has consistently been on the wrong side of every issue we care about throughout his career is absolutely confounding to me.

amazing. Assault weapon ban wrong. amazing

I honestly don't know what to say.

I also take it you don't date and were a test tube baby and have no female siblings, friends, or coworkers.

So I'm not going to argue about my opinion. You have yours. I have mine. Reasonable people have differences of opinion all the time. It doesn't mean either one of us is wrong.

but please, vote blue in the general..

Do you even realize what this sounds like?

Some have been in jail for quite some time.

As I said before, I like pot, I miss pot, and I'd go back to smoking it tomorrow if it was legal here. I'm hoping we'll get that done soon.

But against all of the obscenities being perpetrated by this administration on the country and the world, making this an election issue at all is extraordinarily petty and selfish.

I am speechless, LongtimeAZDem.

One affects me. The other does not.

Gotcha...never mind, then...

Not one Democrat over several years acknowledged the issues I was having. In fact, I was accused of lying several times. The usual response was, "It helps ME so much!" or "It helps these other people so much!" The implication being that I don't matter, of course. Only other people do.

So don't try to act as if my statement is new. It is the norm for all voters.

So he passed that law. Good, I suppose, if it helps. Sometimes bills don't help as much as the name implies. But that has nothing to do with legalizing pot, which has NOT been accomplished yet.

So to give someone a pass for not doing something because they did something else...well....the two things are unrelated.

Made things worse for you? And it should not have mattered that it helped others?

helped others, so it didn't matter that it made things worse for me and many others?

seems to me you'd have to be wealthy and thought you had a better deal before. However, you could keep employer based insurance that you had, so it is hard to see how the subsidized policy you got where you had nothing before was worse.

What if I were to say, about someone not passing voter's rights laws, "But he got bridges in several states in the midwest repaired"?

The two things are unrelated. And only one affects you. Good about those bridges, but that doesn't help voter's rights in your state.

Voters vote their own interests. You are not likely to vote for someone who won't push for voter's rights, because he repaired bridges in Georgia.

Many studies have shown that most people vote their personal beliefs, even though that may hurt them personally. It doesn't exactly take an intellectual leap to realize that's true, either.

you would vote for someone who got the infrastructure funding increased to repair highways in the midwest, if he refused to push for lowering the cost of pharmaceuticals?

After all, he did this other thing for the midwest (even though you don't live in the midwest).

It's never an argument to vote for someone that won't do something, because he did that other thing over there.

That post said nothing -- showed just a reaction

She's implying that's what the post I was responding to, or my post, was about. Which is what not.

The post I was responding to was about the domestic violence act vs. position on legalizing pot.

Capiche? I knew that you would.

SMH.

other; both should be valued. If mounting an argument on a stupid forum leads to rejecting the worth of a law that protects women and children from violence, even death, shouldn't that be rethought? Especially with an excuse that it doesn't affect you personally?

What's wrong with this picture?

SMH...

..its already legal where i live so not an issue.

it's a federal crime.

has been misunderstood with surprising vigor.
There is a statement from Joe on MJ legalization that's been going around today that is a decade old. Many, many people's thoughts about this have changed in the last decade. I will wait to see what he has to say about it these days.
It is not an insignificant issue, considering the violence of imprisonment that so many have endured.

Ending bankruptcy for student debt was. Voting to repeal Glass-Steagall was. Voting to allow states to overturn Roe v Wade was. Voting against gay marriage was.

The VAWA was good, but it doesn't make up for his appalling record overall.

just saying.

I had heard the opposite on NPR.

And if somehow by a miracle he did he wouldn’t beat Trump.

The sole justification for Biden's candidacy is one I don't find remotely convincing, suffice to say.

that they think they can't beat an asshole with an approval rating consistently under 40%.

No, I'm not underestimating the jerk. Part of the reason he's gotten as far as he has is from people not taking him seriously enough. But do I think he's beatable by any of our candidates if they're aggressive enough against him? Hell yeah.

College win by Trump. He only has one path.

I think Biden is the only one who can win us those, and that's pretty much the ball game.

some that could beat Trump. We underestimated Trump in 2016. Won’t get fooled again.

don't call about that stuff any more and we have to get Dotard out of office - who cares about any of that stuff in light of the fact giving the Dotard another term could actually ruin the Republic. Get perspective.

How he voted as a senator is a strong indicator of the sort of president he'll be. He's made a lot of awful decisions in his career and there's no evidence that he's become any more progressive with the passage of time. He opposed desegregating buses in 1974 when he was 32 and, 31 years later at age 63, made it impossible for students in debt to declare bankruptcy.

You act like he's our only choice and he isn't. Far from it.

....via forced busing. Since that time it's been generally accepted that forced busing to desegregate schools was a failure and counter productive..

just not as strongly left on either as you, or I, would wish. But he has many other assets that rule him in for consideration, not just those two huge basic requirements he meets.

Don't attack Dems.

Defend him writing the precusor to the Patriot Act. Or voting for the Iraq war. Or the bankruptcy bill. Or against Roe v Wade.

Not going to do it.

Last edited Tue Apr 30, 2019, 09:14 AM - Edit history (1)

You never "listed" the things you say he's done, so telling someone to refute them isn't really logical.

In any case, other candidates with long careers have long ago evolved in their views and their positions on topics, and even party affiliation.

What they have done recently, and said about their past career recently has far more weight.

Since doing so would have me sign on to specific policies I am not yet entirely committed to. I also find I do not fit what I feel to be the “right” ideological stance across the curriculum, so to speak.
Now I thought it ok on DU to fit more of a centrist democrat mold, as I am seeing I must if I do not meet the criteria to be a “true” progressive.
I certainly endorse some progressive ideas and policies. But I do not subscribe to every solution progressives as a group have decided on.
So I am having a political identity problem.
I admit I don’t like the notion of being on or off the bus, i.e., on the wrong or the right side of issues. First of all, in the context having the “right stuff” to be a post-midterm progressive, it seems group credentialing is candidate driven.
If I support Biden, I am a priori not a progressive.
And from a progressive perspective, Biden’s record is static. If he was not for busing and affirmative action in 1973, he is perforce, for 2020, insensitive to issues affecting POC.
If he voted to authorize the president to invade Iraq, later criticism of the war does not count.
Anyone is welcome to correct me a) on my understanding of what a progressive is b) my implied criticism of progressive-think.

Wrong side of every issue? Prove it.

I see his candidacy as a massive step backwards and not forwards.

Again, being better than Trump should not be our damn standard. That's hardly an impressive milestone to overcome.

You claimed he's been wrong on every issue. Now you say he's been wrong sometimes. Nice.

These were not minor issues he was on the wrong side of, but all you care about is word structure.

time maybe leave off the "hyperbole".

And it doesn't bother you...why?

I like him to wipe out trump.. we'll see if another candidate emerges who can do that.

Advantage for sure. Of course we have no idea how the others would have handled all these issues.

But this is no time to require purity. This is a country that allowed the Dotard to be POTUS. Even the Russian interference only means people let themselves be influenced rather than thinking for themselves. Those same voters aren't going to turn progressive in 4 years.

"....consistently been on the wrong side of every issue we care about throughout his career..." ?

That's simply not true.

because..

I can't believe that Biden is called out for insensitivity when McDonald has never had to answer for the horrible things he's said and implied he did.

Joe is an experienced politician, having been involved in two previous primary election contests, and, at least theoretically, has learned from those two losses. I think Joe can handle a little vetting this time around.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

Biden/Harris would be way more electable.

I think that is the best ticket for Democrats, but its still early, so we'll see.

Beto could use a little more seasoning... just not enough experience in my view.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

all these little attacks on Biden are proving futile.

Sort of like watching kids shoot at a tank with slingshots.

.....somebody's scared.

Remember HRC.

I’ve made the case that the Bankruptcy Act 2005 is a significant liability and am ready to move on.

So all the horror stories are simply not true.

If they’re not they won’t. I’ve spent to much time reading up on Bankruptcy, I’ve had it for now.

Look, If Joe Biden wins the Democratic nomination, I believe he can win the GE handsomely, and take back the Senate. I don’t believe that he, and he alone can do that, but that’s what the Primaries are for.