News:

Welcome to the new (and now only) Fora!

Main Menu

2020 Elections

Started by spork, June 22, 2019, 01:48:12 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Sun_Worshiper

Quote from: Ruralguy on September 30, 2020, 08:27:27 AM
As time went on, I think maybe Biden looked a bit better, but it was only after everything went into crazy town.

Part of me thinks Biden should just take on a debate "rope a dope" strategy and just let Trump talk  crazier and crazier (because that is clearly inevitable) . The problem with that is it takes too long, and lets him (Biden) look even more exposed and weak.

Next time, Biden should definitely stick with some of the talking direct to the American people stuff, maybe drop most of the "shut up" and "clown" stuff.  A bit more positive energy, though it would be difficult, would help. There's probably no way to "win" these things these days, but you can lose by letting it get the better of you.

I agree with all of this.  I think Biden came out on top, but mostly Trump lost as opposed to Biden winning. 

Parasaurolophus

The notion of 'winning' one of these things make no sense at all, IMO. But I have to say, I think Trump came off better than Biden.

Partly, that's because he was energetic, confident, unruffled, and mostly coherent, while Biden started out very poorly (although he rallied when he got back to the COVID talking points!), and sounded... old. But mostly, it's because Trump pretty much achieved all of his goals: he obfuscated his record, he shouted out to his constituencies, he stoked up fear and hatred, plausibly painted Biden as totally out to lunch (which, to be clear, he wasn't), threw in a few (real, but...) healthcare goodies, and ended with "300+ judges".

Biden didn't collapse, but he also didn't manage to articulate any kind of vision to galvanize his support, which is what he desperately needs to do, especially in the face of naked fascism. He's polling ahead, but struggling to get any enthusiasm or momentum, and that's how you counteract the dampening effect of the scary shit the other side's stoking up.

I really, really don't like this strategy of sitting back and letting Trump show his colours. Those colours are horrific and scary, to be sure, but also, the fact is that it leaves Trump in control of the message. And that allows him to dangle just enough in front of non-fascist Republicans and "independents" for them to excuse themselves for voting for him. Biden is not in control of this election, and it seems to me he hasn't really tried to take control of it at all. He's sitting behind his fortifications and letting the enemy throw itself upon them--which makes sense when you're the one holding on to the objective and you just have to beat back the attackers, but Biden is not currently in possession of the presidency, so...
I know it's a genus.

writingprof

How do those of you on the left interpret the Green New Deal confusion?  "I don't support the Green New Deal" and "The Green New Deal will pay for itself."  I read this as Biden misspeaking, having meant to say, "My plan, which is distinct from the Green New Deal, will pay for itself." 

Is that what others understood?

Parasaurolophus

Quote from: writingprof on September 30, 2020, 09:30:27 AM
How do those of you on the left interpret the Green New Deal confusion?  "I don't support the Green New Deal" and "The Green New Deal will pay for itself."  I read this as Biden misspeaking, having meant to say, "My plan, which is distinct from the Green New Deal, will pay for itself." 

Is that what others understood?

I think it's pretty much something along those lines. There's a contradiction at work, because it's true that Biden doesn't support the GND, as he's made abundantly clear a number of times (plus, see his campaign talk in coal country); but he knows it's an important and galvanizing issue, and his website says the GND is "a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face". It's a tough needle to thread, and he's never been the nimblest needle-threader around.

So yeah, I think he's just equivocating on "GND", sometimes referring to it as the thing promoted by AOC and the "kids" for whom he has "no empathy", and sometimes referring to it as the thing they made him put up on his website and incorporate into his platform.
I know it's a genus.

mamselle

I eschewed the debates and participated in my usual Tuesday night folk dance.

I suspect a well-structured folk dance is more likely to impart order to the cosmos.

M.
Forsake the foolish, and live; and go in the way of understanding.

Reprove not a scorner, lest they hate thee: rebuke the wise, and they will love thee.

Give instruction to the wise, and they will be yet wiser: teach the just, and they will increase in learning.

Cheerful

Quote from: mamselle on September 30, 2020, 10:39:49 AM
I eschewed the debates and participated in my usual Tuesday night folk dance.
I suspect a well-structured folk dance is more likely to impart order to the cosmos.
M.

Smart.  The entire country could use a Tuesday night folk dance.

writingprof

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 30, 2020, 10:08:03 AM
Quote from: writingprof on September 30, 2020, 09:30:27 AM
How do those of you on the left interpret the Green New Deal confusion?  "I don't support the Green New Deal" and "The Green New Deal will pay for itself."  I read this as Biden misspeaking, having meant to say, "My plan, which is distinct from the Green New Deal, will pay for itself." 

Is that what others understood?

I think it's pretty much something along those lines. There's a contradiction at work, because it's true that Biden doesn't support the GND, as he's made abundantly clear a number of times (plus, see his campaign talk in coal country); but he knows it's an important and galvanizing issue, and his website says the GND is "a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face". It's a tough needle to thread, and he's never been the nimblest needle-threader around.

So yeah, I think he's just equivocating on "GND", sometimes referring to it as the thing promoted by AOC and the "kids" for whom he has "no empathy", and sometimes referring to it as the thing they made him put up on his website and incorporate into his platform.

May I just say--and this applies to both parties--that I could do without ever hearing again the promise that Initiative X will "pay for itself"?  No, it won't.  Stop it.  That any voter still falls for that foolishness is an indictment of our education system.


spork

Quote from: Cheerful on September 30, 2020, 10:53:41 AM
Quote from: mamselle on September 30, 2020, 10:39:49 AM
I eschewed the debates and participated in my usual Tuesday night folk dance.
I suspect a well-structured folk dance is more likely to impart order to the cosmos.
M.

Smart.  The entire country could use a Tuesday night folk dance.

I didn't watch any of it either. Three old white guys on TV shouting at each other? Simultaneously boring and embarrassing. I wish my ancestry would qualify me for citizenship within the EU, but alas. And unfortunately my wife doesn't qualify either.
It's terrible writing, used to obfuscate the fact that the authors actually have nothing to say.

secundem_artem

I did not watch the debate, but I would not be surprised if Trump's behavior was specifically designed to create disgust with the entire political process.  His followers would happily floss their tooth with barbed wire if they could vote for him, any amount of disgust notwithstanding.  Those a bit lukewarm on Sleepy Joe, on the other hand, may be more likely to say to hell with the whole process and just stay home.  It's just another version of voter suppression.
Funeral by funeral, the academy advances

fourhats

QuoteI wish my ancestry would qualify me for citizenship within the EU, but alas.

Would you go? There was an Op-Ed this morning in the NYT about how people are looking into EU and Canadian moves. I do have an EU passport, but worry about Covid there as well.

lightning

Quote from: fourhats on September 30, 2020, 12:56:39 PM
QuoteI wish my ancestry would qualify me for citizenship within the EU, but alas.

Would you go? There was an Op-Ed this morning in the NYT about how people are looking into EU and Canadian moves. I do have an EU passport, but worry about Covid there as well.

Absolutely, I would go live in the EU. But I would have to go as an undocumented something or another since I'm not allowed to even visit the EU, right now. I suppose I could take a small boat to a Greek island.

spork

Quote from: fourhats on September 30, 2020, 12:56:39 PM
QuoteI wish my ancestry would qualify me for citizenship within the EU, but alas.

Would you go? There was an Op-Ed this morning in the NYT about how people are looking into EU and Canadian moves. I do have an EU passport, but worry about Covid there as well.

Yes. Better health outcomes, food, and overall quality of life, far less gun violence, stronger communities. Less willful ignorance. My wife is technically a dual-national; her homeland is a repressive dictatorship. We have no urge to migrate there. But the USA is looking more Third World by the day. Canada would be nice.

As for Covid-19, according to the data collected by Johns Hopkins, the USA's deaths/100K ratio is just slightly behind that of the UK, and higher than that of Italy, Sweden, France, Netherlands, etc. And this pandemic will eventually burn itself out; the most vulnerable will have died off in the initial wave of infection and vaccines will be available.
It's terrible writing, used to obfuscate the fact that the authors actually have nothing to say.

dismalist

QuoteBut the USA is looking more Third World by the day.

It can be empirically demonstrated that the US of A is in fact the most advanced Third World country! :-)
That's not even wrong!
--Wolfgang Pauli

spork

Quote from: dismalist on September 30, 2020, 02:38:07 PM
QuoteBut the USA is looking more Third World by the day.

It can be empirically demonstrated that the US of A is in fact the most advanced Third World country! :-)

I know. I'm teaching a course on the subject this semester.
It's terrible writing, used to obfuscate the fact that the authors actually have nothing to say.