Biden ran on a return to sensibility, bipartisan dialogue and functional government. That’s the opposite of “taking the fight” to anyone. He didn’t start acting aggressive in the slightest until the last State of the Union.
He even went out of his way to sound calm most of the time.
I support her challenge, but she needs to tell us how she would deal with republicans. I’m not dumb enough to think we can just promise single payer health care, for instance, without a plan for how to actually make that happen when we don’t have the seats or the Supreme Court.
I remember Obama. Hope and promises aren’t good enough. What’s your plan for combating obstruction? Biden had a plan for that, and was able to actually deliver some stuff.
Til I hear something workable on that, I’m going with the experienced guy.
I think it’s safe to assume that a person wants their society to function smoothly. But yes, I suppose it is technically different.
The DNC does not decide if AOC runs or not, just like they couldn’t choose whether Bernie ran or not. Otherwise they would have.
AOC decides if AOC runs.
I don’t share your optimism that she would sweep though, I think she’d come across as too young to a lot of voters. I’m hoping she picks up a Senate seat soon, and then runs from that in the future. I think it’ll put her in a better position to win.
De-platforming has proven ineffective. The best thing to happen to Trump was getting kicked off Twitter. Now he gets to spout all his bullshit and radicalize his fanbase with minimal pushback and reduced awareness from the public at large.
If de-platforming genuinely worked, then anti-semitism would have died out by now. But it won’t so long as people can form their own communities and recruit under-the-radar.
Inherent to democracy, no. Inherent to a well-functioning society in a world where changing circumstances are inevitable, yes.
I did. I saw a tired old man and a used car salesman. More importantly though, is I don’t think almost everyone gives two shits about debates or polls. They know these two guys, know them well. What they offer is clear.
Additionally, I don’t think a President has to be spry. They just need to be good at delegation, that is by far the most important skill. If you think about monarchy, the king did not need to run everything. Simply assign the tasks to people who did know all the details. Generals run the army. Finance ministers run economy. Diplomats run diplomacy. Etc.
No, there’s a lot of us that don’t want to surrender the incumbent advantage for the very common backlash-against-the-last-party phenomenon we’ve seen many times in the past decades.
We’re just not as loud as everyone else, and our position makes terrible clickbait.
Someone must always make decisions, a world where no decisions are made would devolve into a Mad Max type thing, where the fact that we are members of the animal kingdom would become very readily apparent. We used to decide these things with trial by combat, where the most skilled warrior (or who chose the most skilled as their champion) was right because God apparently said so, by making him so good at fighting. Still a person making a decision. Not far off from a world where you decide if someone was a witch by trying to build a bridge out of them.
The modern trick is dividing up the decision-making power so much that nobody can assemble it all into their personal toolkit and fully embrace corruption with no consequences.
Very well summarized, I think this hits the majority of the most relevant points.
Well, I am not that guy for the record. But if you read the article it said he automatically rejects any candidate that advocates for gun control. So, that means Biden is flat out for him, along with pretty much the whole dem party.
The amusing part to me personally was that such a person would normally just vote gop. But that specific guy cannot, for fairly obvious reasons.
A hardcore second amendment voter will usually resist any and all measures that restrict firearm possession, often on the basis of slippery slope arguments. Since the basis is rooted in a classic logical fallacy, they can be very difficult to persuade.
You’re right though, Biden has been fairly moderate on gun control. So was Obama though, and you remember how they reacted to him?
Profound believer in the second amendment and profound supporter of racial justice. Yikes, I really feel for the guy, that’s a tough one.
Funniest comment I’ve read in a pretty long time, props.
Sure. Just make sure you figure out some sort of way to either guard against or punish
“oh noes, I feel threatened.” bang
Because only a fool would think that won’t be taken advantage of.
They don’t have to come back on this shuttle, there are other ways to get them home. Assuming it’s being resupplied at the normal level, they should be able to remain aboard the station for a few extra months without any trouble. That would be without any extra resupply as well.
Ah, LinkedIn, exactly where I want to get nuanced answers to weird questions from.
I feel like his approach to fatherhood is similar to his approach for businesses–the more the merrier. There are only so many hours in a day though.
Assuming someone is a genuine progressive, the single-issue voter accusation is very hard to make stick. Progressives have one of the clearest and broadest sets of platform goals of anyone. I wouldn’t worry about it.
A genuine hamas supporter, as opposed to a peace supporter, they might be a single issue voter. But I think those are very much in the minority, and most progressives just want peace and equality for Palestine and do not support warfighting.
Pretty tame stuff really. Video would also show he spoke pretty softly and soothingly during that debate if memory serves. I watched it live.