Huh? Having no opposition in government for an election cycle or two isn't magically prevented. This makes no sense. Remember what I said about arguments that have to constantly change and becomes less and less?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Biden: "Vote for me but stay a Republican, because we need a Republican Party."
- Thread starter Deleted member 3812
- Start date
Huh? Having no opposition in government for an election cycle or two isn't magically prevented. This makes no sense. Remember what I said about arguments that have to constantly change and becomes less and less?
Have I not separated the first statement from the second enough times for you to not get my point? He goes on to say that he's worried about the Republicans getting clobbered in the next election and that it could result in the countervailing force being taken away.
And the very idea that a possible result of the next 10 elections is that there is no Republican party is so absurd that I don't even get why you're bothering to make the defense. It's like if a politician was suddenly afraid that if we go to Mars we'll be inviting a Martian invasion of Earth.
We have Trump because of a ton of different factors, Hillary being a bad candidate (mostly because she'd been attacked, had movies attacking, etc. for decades before running) being one of them. You're also assuming that I'm a Warren and Sanders fan, I'm not. Your entire argument here has been strawmanning.
If you don't vote at all you're supporting no one but Trump, and I'll call you out accordingly.
I'm saying many people who are making arguments for centrists aren't doing so because of pragmatism. It's about an ideological belief. It's not smart politics. People who dislike Biden have a right to call him out for his shit as not representative of the Democratic Party.
There are a lot of people who don't want the world to change and should just own up to it. People disagree with Trump, but they don't care enough to solve inequality or sacrifice anything to get universal healthcare and college.
Like, let's just get to the basis of your argument here.
If that happens for dems (it won't), are you afraid that we'd be heading to a one party state? Cause that's Reagan's map right there.
Maybe when Biden said clobbered referring to the upcoming election he actually meant "beaten in every single possible position and then the Democrats declare the Republican Party a terrorist organization and start executing the leaders and detaining supporters"
Well, yeah. Boomers are a meme for a reason. Maybe Dems should focus on energising new members rather than people who think the literal nazi-adjacent party "have some good ideas" and are worth coddling.
The Founders created two parties, the Democrats and the Republicans. However, they have one fatal weakness; if people stop believing in them (sort of like Tinkerbell) they die and cannot be brought back to life. Thus both must be kept alive, no matter what.
Even worse, some of their wiser Founders foresaw that if a political party ever went away, it would be impossible to create a new one, and America would become a one party state.
Now ideally, they would have created some more political parties, you know like spares, to make sure if a party ever went away, America would not slip into tyranny, but alas they did not get around to it.
Joe understands this, which is why he has said what he has.
Even worse, some of their wiser Founders foresaw that if a political party ever went away, it would be impossible to create a new one, and America would become a one party state.
Now ideally, they would have created some more political parties, you know like spares, to make sure if a party ever went away, America would not slip into tyranny, but alas they did not get around to it.
Joe understands this, which is why he has said what he has.
Your trying to dismiss me without actually engaging in what I'm saying. I never said you were a fan of Warren or Sanders, and I typed about Hilary being damaged goods but I deleted it because it's beside the point.
Let me spell it out. Biden is trying to appeal to people in both parties. Political parties exist because different things are important to different groups of people. Biden is suggesting that we should not destroy or ignore these groups of people. Stop with this strawman bullshit. Address the point in bold and let's stop getting bogged down in irrelevant points like if I said you liked Bernie Sanders. If all you have to say is strawman argument and the republican party needs to be completely destroyed in order for change then I'm done here.
No clobbered here is meant as destroyed and no longer presenting any kind of opposition, not simply losing in the election. There's no reason to talk about "a" republican party and then suddenly suggest the way it exists now is needed as long as the president changes.
Saying it's ok to not vote in the general because you don't like Biden should be called out for the privileged, harmful bullshit it is. It only benefits the people you supposedly dislike, unless you suddenly believe these same people will listen to reason and see the amazing sacrifice you forced others to bear and reconsider their ways.
We had 8 years of obama showing that this strategy doesn't work, so...
Young people not already passionate about politics have a history of not voting. Regardless of party. I'm starting to think if voting for Obama had not been historic many young and black voters would not have turned out for that. I can only talk from my personal life but many people didn't even know Obama's policies or what he planned to do in office.
8 years of Obama showed that a democratic president cant get anything done with a Republican controlled Senate.
That's on the voters
Young people can prove they're worth a damn by voting, and don't say they've never been catered to. They have.
It has historically always been true that young people don't fucking vote, and focusing on them at the expense of the older generation is a surefire way to lose.
I addressed the point several posts back:
And here:
I then went on to address your arguments on what you think my views are and what you think my points are, since, like, why bother mentioning Warren and Sanders otherwise (though, spoilers: BOTH of them have said they'd welcome Republican votes on numerous occasions). Not to mention you started in this thread by saying that Biden was worried about there being a one party system when that's not what anyone has implied as a result repeatedly, so, yeah, that is the definition of a strawman. Sorry. It's also not even a vague possibility. Like, again, refer to the Reagan map post.
Again, that point, if I take it at face value, as so little basis in reality and possibility as a scenario that it's still insane.
I don't like one party states, period, even if they happen to be progressive parties or movements, so I don't disagree with the gist of this argument. That said, in the U.S. context...I think the Republican party already has plenty of power. If anything, they need to be hit harder at this point. Not softer.
Plus maybe the candidate himself shouldn't necessarily be the person saying this. At least not until the general election.
Plus maybe the candidate himself shouldn't necessarily be the person saying this. At least not until the general election.
Only if we can finally admit that leftist are absolutely shit at selling their message and ideals when Bernie doesn't even make it out of the primaries?
Naw how about we progressive do the smart then and focus on the real enemy instead of tearing each other apart?
Biden has certainly been consistently absurdly naive about the chances of the Republicans turning back to "normal" after Trump -- I agree, their party is changed now for the worse and will not just snap back to "normal" -- but I think that what he's saying here is pretty much the same as what you do, we need Republicans who still believe in having a democratic system... I don't know how many of them we still HAVE, but two parties who believe in democracy are needed for it to function.
So that's the question, isn't it -- should more moderate Republicans continue to leave their party? Most of the base isn't leaving though, so that probably just means electoral irrelevance for them...I don't know what the solution is, beside being unhappy about the direction this country is going in (ie, towards authoritarianism), but moderate Republicans aren't just going to all become liberals just because their party has abandoned them, I would think.
Republicans won his first midterms in 2010. He lost the majority even earlier via special election IIRC.
Edit: Sorry Republicans gained the filibuster in the Senate.
Haha really? I've heard so many people say that Rebublicans always blocked him at the senate level and that's why he couldn't get anything done. So I've just always assumed that was the case.
Actually, that's exactly correct.
It is the responsibility of the educated voter to choose the candidate that best reflects what they think the country will do. Campaigning and governing and entirely separate skills, and in an ideal world, I pick whoever is best suited for the job regardless of their ability to create "buzz".
If you pick a worse candidate, or don't vote, because they didn't "amp you up", I guess you needed some fucking bullshit entertainment value to get children out of literal concentration camps. Cool for you.
That said, yeah, all these dudes could use some work.
I'll take a thousand Joes before another Donald tbh but my huge concern here is that the guy is just so fucking vanilla there's no way he landslides Trump and plenty of ways he loses
Yes but it had the same net effect. Losing Kennedy's special election also neutered their Senate advantage.
Obama had 2 years where dems controlled both house and Senate and he could've ramed through through a fuck ton of progressive shit to move the country forward and secure his legacy.
Instead, the candidate who ran on "change" spent 2 years as a center right moderate who tried to play nice with a party that called him the n-word behind his back and only barely managed to pass a band aid health care plan that no one was satisfied with and which Trump has gutted into oblivion.
Well no they had a majority in the House until 2010, which is all you need to pass things through that Chamber.
They could also have ended the filibuster in the Senate, and done more, but they opted not to, which was a strategic decision. Blaming that on the voters is silly.
They did all this because they thought if they seemed reasonable and moderate, the GOP and voters would reward them for it, which to tie all this back into the core of the topic;
didn't work
We absolutely do not need the Republican Party, because they cater to the far-right. If we had a socially liberal and economically conservative party, then that at least would be tolerable (still bad, though). Ideally, it's imperative that both parties get pushed left to varying degrees, just as other countries in the world, such as the UK. His comment about one party having too much power is bad. Yes. I agree. But, that doesn't exclusively apply to the Republican Party, but also the Democratic Party as well. They have become political parties that sell out to the highest bidder of any corporate lobbyist group and the mainstream media outlets are their PR.
They lost the House in 2010. You need both chambers to pass a bill so he was basically a lame duck after that.
For the same reason Bernie Sanders magically became a Democracy for the last two presidential primaries.
There is strength in numbers.
Bernie could easily lead any of the socialist parties. But the party wouldn't be big enough to hand him a won even if everyone in it voted for him.
So he declares Democracy and goes for the primary win, to get the nom, and get the numbers of the much larger ( and competitive) party behind him.
So long as either D or R exists as a major party, we're not likely to see multiple parties sprouting up in the US due to relevancy numbers. Instead, we get divisions within the larger parties fighting for control of the whole.
Uhh yes, losing a chamber in Congress is basically the same as losing both of them. There was no reason to end the fillibuster when the GOP had the house. The voters didn't show up in any midterm election of Obama's presidency. This isn't controversial.
He only had the recession to deal with. No biggie.
1. I have voted in every election (national, state, and local) since I was eligible to vote so stop with that "you must have never voted so let me sneer at you" attitude.
2. Yes, most people are too busy to do the research because we live in a shit economy where working two jobs is barely enough to live. So unfortunately you need people to do stuff to convince voters to vote for you.
3. I am not letting this go, I have repeatedly on this forum been accused of not doing enough with the assumption that I'm some lazy ass whiner who has never voted when I'm deeply involved in my local political scene so to see again and again people assuming i never vote then proceed to treat me like absolute shit for not doing something I'm heavily involved in is absolutely fucking tiring!
I see
I see
So playing nice with Republicans backfired
They don't lose that Chamber until 2010, in effect until 2011 when the new Congress sits.
Pretty much. We are supposed to eat shit and smile as long as that shit doesn't come from a republican ass. Republican-lite is fine though.
He had a very busy first two years and didn't expect to lose the 2010 midterms and the 2014 ones despite winning the Presidency. Maybe Democrats could've been more aggressive in the first two years but they were already spending fuck tons of money bailing out the country.
Clearly we don't need a Democratic party, cuz these fucking morons beat themselves...
They don't even need Repubs to run against them, they already cape for these fuckers every chance they get.
Meanwhile Repubs give Dems piss and shit to choke on. You'll never catch Repubs saying this shit about Dems.
Dems are fucking pussies to the highest order.
Nuke everybody. Nuke everything
They don't even need Repubs to run against them, they already cape for these fuckers every chance they get.
Meanwhile Repubs give Dems piss and shit to choke on. You'll never catch Repubs saying this shit about Dems.
Dems are fucking pussies to the highest order.
Nuke everybody. Nuke everything
Ok?
They had the recession to cleanup the first two years and again, nobody pictured that voters would sit out both midterms despite still electing him President both times. Maybe if it was known that democrats didn't vote in midterms he would have been able to strategize differently.
So would you say he was too busy cleaning up the mess left for him during his first 2 years that by the time he got around to implementing the changes he wanted, the power had shifted away from him to make those changes?
And that it's fair to put that on voters?
Trotting out child concentration camps to try and guilt trip someone on a forum for not being thrilled to do the work for democrats is a bit rich considering they started under Obama.