View: https://x.com/msnbc/status/1810501680535937298?s=46
White House was pressured by today's reporting to the point of disclosing that he had a neurological exam which tested for signs pointing towards multiple conditions, including Parkinson's, about four months ago.
Tests are said to have come back with no findings out of the ordinary
The problem is that this doesn't account for the eight different visits over the course of the last 12 months. Unless the annual physical got pushed seven different times. Keep in mind that White House visitor logs are a matter of public record.
I gotta be real, there's a lot of smoke and this doesn't exactly get rid of it.
Here's the thing, I don't think this is that. The letter very specifically only addresses a single meeting, of which he is more likely than not being totally truthful about. There's no reason to assume he's lying here. The question isn't "is he lying?" but "what were the other seven visits about?"Do we have to post Ronny's letter to remind people about how far off these can be?
Here's the thing, I don't think this is that. The letter very specifically only addresses a single meeting, of which he is more likely than not being totally truthful about. There's no reason to assume he's lying here. The question isn't "is he lying?" but "what were the other seven visits about?"
If Biden steps aside, whom Democrats would want to replace him — and how | YouGov
Two-thirds of Democrats and Democratic-leaning Independents would approve of Vice President Kamala Harris becoming the presidential nominee, if Biden steps down.today.yougov.com
Here's the thing, he probably isn't. He might not actually know or there might be a legit reason. It could be whatever he tests was doing needed to be done over a length of time. That sort of thing wouldn't surprise me at all. All that said, this is a moment in time where the only way out is total honesty and full disclosure. Where overexplaining is required.A distinction without a difference, when as you say that doesn't explain the numerous other visits. Something is up.
Willfully withholding all of the information is dishonesty.
Point is it doesn't matter. Only one of the two will run. If they wanted a meaningful poll, they should have asked "Which of these two would you never vote for."There were only two options in the poll LOL. What kind of question is that? The question was: "Who would you prefer to be the Democratic nominee?" in a poll of registered Dem voters by YouGov. YouGov did not include any other options likely because they think it's unrealistic that it's not one of those two.
My understanding is the doctor was there multiple times, including some times Biden wasn't at the White House, because of this:The problem is that this doesn't account for the eight different visits over the course of the last 12 months. Unless the annual physical got pushed seven different times. Keep in mind that White House visitor logs are a matter of public record.
I gotta be real, there's a lot of smoke and this doesn't exactly get rid of it.
It wouldn't surprise me if they had him in on this, but this is the sort of thing you need to actually say. The reporting wasn't about one visit, it was about eight. Only addressing one makes it look like you have something to hide. If this is all there was to it then say so and move past it. Don't answer part of the question, answer the whole question. Answering only part of the question is how we wind up here in the first place. That they didn't answer the question just shines a big spotlight on it!My understanding is the doctor was there multiple times, including some times Biden wasn't at the White House, because of this:
Fully agree. They're terrible at being transparent right now and it does make them look shady. If they're just... forgetting to mention details like this, that's equally troubling.It wouldn't surprise me if they had him in on this, but this is the sort of thing you need to actually say. The reporting wasn't about one visit, it was about eight. Only addressing one makes it look like you have something to hide. If this is all there was to it then say so and move past it. Don't answer part of the question, answer the whole question. Answering only part of the question is how we wind up here in the first place.
If you'd watch the clip I responded to you with it goes into this. The neurologist comes to the White House for a clinic that treats White House staff and service members multiple times a yearThe problem is that this doesn't account for the eight different visits over the course of the last 12 months. Unless the annual physical got pushed seven different times. Keep in mind that White House visitor logs are a matter of public record.
I gotta be real, there's a lot of smoke and this doesn't exactly get rid of it.
The problem is that this doesn't account for the eight different visits over the course of the last 12 months. Unless the annual physical got pushed seven different times. Keep in mind that White House visitor logs are a matter of public record.
I gotta be real, there's a lot of smoke and this doesn't exactly get rid of it.
Records from the Obama administration, when Mr. Biden was vice president, show that Dr. Cannard made 10 visits in 2012 plus a family tour; four visits in 2013; and one in 2014.
the cynical weaponization of ageism and ableism to mute any legitimate criticism of Biden's mental acuity might break me.
View: https://x.com/abbydphillip/status/1810517735421403513
Stewart did a segment on it. I assume it'ls going to make people angry.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9LZXheHddI
If only Harris was like Selina Meyer.This is like a season of Veep except not funny because the fate of American democracy hangs in the balance.
Stewart did a segment on it. I assume it'ls going to make people angry.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9LZXheHddI
Stewart did a segment on it. I assume it'ls going to make people angry.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9LZXheHddI
A majority (56%) of polled Dems think she would be just as likely or more likely than Biden to win
Stewart did a segment on it. I assume it'ls going to make people angry.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9LZXheHddI
Damn, I had seen most of those clips, but the one from two years ago where he's asking where a Representative was at a speech, but the Rep. had died six weeks prior in a car crash with her staffers, and to whom he had written a condolences for.... that does not look so good, especially with the current context. Biden and gaffes are like chocolate and peanut butter so it makes it extra hard to figure out, but that kind of thing feels like more than a gaffe. But who knows, we're left to take Biden's word.
Should be required viewing for everyone telling us "shut up and get in line".
The points Stewart makes about France and the UKs blisteringly fast election cycles vs. DNC inability to rally behind a new candidate with far more time is scathing… as is Biden in his own words saying there's at least 50 other democrats that could beat Trump not that long ago…
Stewart did a segment on it. I assume it'ls going to make people angry.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9LZXheHddI
We aren't debating if we're going to vote for him. Obviously we are. We're debating whether undecideds will vote for him.
Stewart did a segment on it. I assume it'ls going to make people angry.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9LZXheHddI
Oh so now you believe the polls? Or is it only when you agree with them, despite an ever increasing amount of them projecting the opposite in all key swing states?But will this stop the doomsayers from this dream that harris will rally dems? Nope
Like I've said it before if he's like this right now what will he be like in the middle of his next term when he's 83-86
Maybe we can call those people dreamsayers now since you say they're too optimistic.But will this stop the doomsayers from this dream that harris will rally dems? Nope
Stewart did a segment on it. I assume it'ls going to make people angry.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9LZXheHddI
it's not just the fact that he is 65+, he is 81, look at him at 70.
That is a really big age split. I guess most Democratic politicians are 65+ themselves so no surprise a lot of them seem opposed to Biden dropping out.
As much as we like to make fun of Republicans for their shameless loyalty to party, it's been illuminating to see many Democrats embrace the same tactics. The gaslighting is surreal.
Ego, mixed with the insulation of yes men and a family focused on cementing a fairytale legacy for him.I don't understand why Democrats seemingly didn't make any effort to nurture new leaders that could conceivably take Biden's place right now for the past 4 (or heck, 8) years,
Like, they couldn't foresee how his age could become a problem 4 years back? No one prepared for this? Why? They're afraid of Biden or something? It's mind boggling.
As much as we like to make fun of Republicans for their shameless loyalty to party, it's been illuminating to see many Democrats embrace the same tactics. The gaslighting is surreal. Acting like there is no problem doesn't make it go away.
This is dire, deeply unpopular VP on top of an incumbent that is going downhill fast. How did dems let themselves get into this position.