The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,829
|
Post by The Bishop on Jul 22, 2024 11:36:12 GMT
It is quite possible, even likely, that Biden's "decline" has become more pronounced only recently. Despite some scepticism, it is now clear that he was perfectly mentally competent to become POTUS back in 2020 when he was basically the same age Trump is now. Given that, Trump being in passable condition for a 78 year old at present is absolutely no guarantee he will still be for a full term. Apart from all the other perfectly sound reasons not to vote for him, of course  Unless there’s further developments Biden will still see out his term and the easy argument is that Trump will be term limited by 2029 so there’s no question of him running again then anyway Well leaving aside the repeated rumblings that Trump wants to abolish the term limit, this may be a sound argument. But it doesn't make it invalid that his opponents will try to sow doubt in voters minds about the wisdom of electing someone who will be 82 come 2028. |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Jul 22, 2024 11:36:33 GMT
Irrelevant to the point under discussion and furthermore I am not proclaiming myself as someone trying to "save democracy". I agree, however you're the one with brought up the issue of "disregarding election results" when it wasnt even being discussed with regard to the events of the past 24 hours... |
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Jul 22, 2024 11:40:25 GMT
This would be valid if he withdrew of his own choice but not when he was essentially forced out. The right: "Biden is such a doddering old fool who dosent even know what day it is. He can't be trusted to run a bath, let alone with the nuclear codes. He should withdraw his intention to run as he isnt fit for office!" *Biden withdraws* The right: "You can't force that guy out of running for office. that's not democratic"  "the right" is not some form of single mind, it compromises many people with a wide range of views. Biden was unfit to run and shouldn't have run in the first place. I have no problem with him being forced out, on the contrary I had a fair few drinks last night to celebrate the political demise of the loathsome old bastard. What I object to is people claiming that they are trying to save democracy while engaging in such an obviously undemocratic act. |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Jul 22, 2024 11:42:09 GMT
Can’t wait to see Harris run rings around Trump in the debates. Trump woudl be crazy to debate Harris .....oh wait I could see that happening actually. Trump could confect some story that he "dosent recognise Harris as the official candidate" [he's dishonest enough] so has no intention of debating her. Quite conceivable |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Jul 22, 2024 11:45:01 GMT
The right: "Biden is such a doddering old fool who dosent even know what day it is. He can't be trusted to run a bath, let alone with the nuclear codes. He should withdraw his intention to run as he isnt fit for office!" *Biden withdraws* The right: "You can't force that guy out of running for office. that's not democratic" "the right" is not some form of single mind, it compromises many people with a wide range of views. Biden was unfit to run and shouldn't have run in the first place. I have no problem with him being forced out, on the contrary I had a fair few drinks last night to celebrate the political demise of the loathsome old bastard. What I object to is people claiming that they are trying to save democracy while engaging in such an obviously undemocratic act. Please confirm the correct "democratic" process for replacing a candidate now deemed (for whatever reason) unfit to stand, at this stage of the electoral cycle. I'll wait. |
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Jul 22, 2024 11:47:32 GMT
You really are an exceptionally silly individual. Of course Trump remembers that he lost the presidency. Are you going to break it to his deplorable supporters or should I? The reason he lost the Presidency is because he got hammered in the election, which is another fact that he can't get his tiny mind around. I heard it put really well the other day - apparently he is not a 'former President' as that means someone who stood down undefeated. He is an 'ex-President' as he was a Loser. Whatever idiocy you heard and choose to believe is irrelevant. That Trump is a former President is not merely a matter of opinion but it is enshrined in Federal law. |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Jul 22, 2024 11:48:02 GMT
Unfortunate choice of words from the BBC correspondent!
"Biden only gets one shot at first public appearance"
published at 12:29
Ione Wells
Reporting from Delaware
|
|
|
|
Post by timmullen on Jul 22, 2024 11:50:04 GMT
I regard the defeat of Trump as a prerequisite for maintaining democracy To bad that you just cheered on the destruction of democracy with the ousting of the person who overwhelming won the Democratic Primary in every single state. Harris as the nominee has no democratic legitimacy whatsoever. With respect this is silly; primaries are a new phenomenon, up until the end of the Nixon era less than half the States held primaries or caucuses of any kind, and of those that did there was a gentleman’s agreement that you didn’t compete in another candidate’s home State primary. They are also, like the General Election itself, not a means to select the candidate merely to select delegates to the Convention. As we saw for example in 2008 there is nothing to prevent a candidate from withdrawing during the Call of the States and either letting their delegates to vote their choice or urging them to unite behind one candidate (Clinton v Obama being the last significant time that happened). |
|
cathyc
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,056
|
Post by cathyc on Jul 22, 2024 11:53:15 GMT
"the right" is not some form of single mind, it compromises many people with a wide range of views. Biden was unfit to run and shouldn't have run in the first place. I have no problem with him being forced out, on the contrary I had a fair few drinks last night to celebrate the political demise of the loathsome old bastard. What I object to is people claiming that they are trying to save democracy while engaging in such an obviously undemocratic act. Please confirm the correct "democratic" process for replacing a candidate now deemed (for whatever reason) unfit to stand, at this stage of the electoral cycle. I'll wait. It reminds me of all the Reform UK candidates who were found to be 'unacceptable' and dropped late on in the campaign but only when Reform Ltd had their racism and wild conspiracy theories pointed out to them. I wonder if their opponents could employ the same grift as Trump seems to be using and recoup expenditure in campaigning against 'the wrong candidate'. When I asked about that previously I was told that another party's (sic) procedures were nothing to do with me. So how come all these comments now about a different party on a different continent? |
|
stb12
Top Poster
Posts: 8,345 
|
Post by stb12 on Jul 22, 2024 11:55:57 GMT
Unless there’s further developments Biden will still see out his term and the easy argument is that Trump will be term limited by 2029 so there’s no question of him running again then anyway Well leaving aside the repeated rumblings that Trump wants to abolish the term limit, this may be a sound argument. But it doesn't make it invalid that his opponents will try to sow doubt in voters minds about the wisdom of electing someone who will be 82 come 2028. That would need a constitutional amendment which is very difficult to get through hence how there’s been so few and none since 1992. I realise there are other concerns going about that Trump will find other methods and ways to just do whatever he wants but I’m trying to avoid getting into the merits or otherwise of those theories |
|
cathyc
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,056
|
Post by cathyc on Jul 22, 2024 11:56:58 GMT
Are you going to break it to his deplorable supporters or should I? The reason he lost the Presidency is because he got hammered in the election, which is another fact that he can't get his tiny mind around. I heard it put really well the other day - apparently he is not a 'former President' as that means someone who stood down undefeated. He is an 'ex-President' as he was a Loser. Whatever idiocy you heard and choose to believe is irrelevant. That Trump is a former President is not merely a matter of opinion but it is enshrined in Federal law. Nope. He's an ex-President as he lost. I knew it wouldn't be long before you forgot. |
|
stb12
Top Poster
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by stb12 on Jul 22, 2024 12:01:52 GMT
On a side note it would be nice if any of this interesting situation could be discussed without everyone sounding so partisan but no doubt that’s wishful thinking on my part
|
|
ricmk
Lib Dem
Posts: 2,608
|
Post by ricmk on Jul 22, 2024 12:01:52 GMT
2 thoughts today:
1) I hadn't expected the anguish from the Trump campaign (and indeed from some right-leaning posters here.) Shows clearly this was the outcome they didn't want, however much they deny it.
2) I'm reminded of 2008. 2 high quality candidates but Barack Obama clearly has the measure of John McCain. Then McCain goes for a left-field VP pick - Alaskan Hockey Mom Sarah Palin. The choice confused the Democrats, who weren't ready for her and took some time to work out how to take her on. Although they managed in the end and her credibility took a knock, that choice felt like it kept the race alive for much longer than a more conventional VP pick would have. Harris may well lose out, her negatives aren't going anywhere, but it feels the contest is live in a way that it didn't yesterday morning.
|
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Jul 22, 2024 12:01:55 GMT
Well leaving aside the repeated rumblings that Trump wants to abolish the term limit, this may be a sound argument. But it doesn't make it invalid that his opponents will try to sow doubt in voters minds about the wisdom of electing someone who will be 82 come 2028. That would need a constitutional amendment which is very difficult to get through hence how there’s been so few and none since 1992. I realise there are other concerns going about that Trump will find other methods and ways to just do whatever he wants but I’m trying to avoid getting into the merits or otherwise of those theories I think you're right that, as it stands, he wont have the numbers in Congress to force Constitutional changes through. But you can bet your life he will be explored every nook and cranny and have the best constitutional lawyers working night and day to find a way. |
|
Jack
Reform Party
Posts: 8,660
|
Post by Jack on Jul 22, 2024 12:02:15 GMT
Whatever idiocy you heard and choose to believe is irrelevant. That Trump is a former President is not merely a matter of opinion but it is enshrined in Federal law. Nope. He's an ex-President as he lost. I knew it wouldn't be long before you forgot. Former President and ex-President literally means the same thing. |
|
|
|
Post by observer on Jul 22, 2024 12:37:05 GMT
2 thoughts today: 1) I hadn't expected the anguish from the Trump campaign (and indeed from some right-leaning posters here.) Shows clearly this was the outcome they didn't want, however much they deny it. 2) I'm reminded of 2008. 2 high quality candidates but Barack Obama clearly has the measure of John McCain. Then McCain goes for a left-field VP pick - Alaskan Hockey Mom Sarah Palin. The choice confused the Democrats, who weren't ready for her and took some time to work out how to take her on. Although they managed in the end and her credibility took a knock, that choice felt like it kept the race alive for much longer than a more conventional VP pick would have. Harris may well lose out, her negatives aren't going anywhere, but it feels the contest is live in a way that it didn't yesterday morning. I really don't see any anguish whatsoever. The Trump campaign will have to change the strategy but they'll be gleeful at the thought of fighting Harris who will prove incapable in every way |
|
riccimarsh
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,906
Member is Online
|
Post by riccimarsh on Jul 22, 2024 12:37:49 GMT
That's not entirely fair. I regard the defeat of Trump as a prerequisite for maintaining democracy & avoiding the creation of a tyranny in the US. I would not put it past Trump to attempt to change the constitution so that he can run for a 3rd term, and he has spoken about locking up political opponents. I do not trust the Supreme Court or other traditional checks & balances to thwart some of his more extreme political desires. Biden & most Democrats surely feel the same, so the only way to avoid this is a Democratic victory in the election. If he feels that he himself can't achieve that as a candidate, then by withdrawing he is thinking about the country as well as his ratings. But political prosecutions of the main opposition candidate on novel criminal charges is fine because it protects democracy? Unprecedented situations might require novel criminal charges, no?? There was never a President who tried to over-turn an election before, so it’s not surprising that such a thing had never previously been charged. And mis-handling of classified information is a hardly a novel charge. |
|
bigfatron
Lib Dem
Posts: 1,950
Member is Online
|
Post by bigfatron on Jul 22, 2024 12:42:17 GMT
That would need a constitutional amendment which is very difficult to get through hence how there’s been so few and none since 1992. I realise there are other concerns going about that Trump will find other methods and ways to just do whatever he wants but I’m trying to avoid getting into the merits or otherwise of those theories I think you're right that, as it stands, he wont have the numbers in Congress to force Constitutional changes through. But you can bet your life he will be explored every nook and cranny and have the best constitutional lawyers working night and day to find a way. Including, lest we forget, that the President can now break the law with impunity (thanks to the recent SC ruling) as long as the law-breaking behaviour relates to an official act; so the trick will be to find a way that allows Trump to run by breaking the law but not the constitution. I don't know whether there is such a loophole, but I'm damn sure there will be people working on it. |
|
riccimarsh
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,906
Member is Online
|
Post by riccimarsh on Jul 22, 2024 12:43:55 GMT
One of the most disturbing things about the Biden presidency has been the willingness of the media to protect Biden. How do they rebuild their reputation, as organisations and individuals? Do the mainstream liberal US media refer, in their regular news reporting (not in opinion columns) to Mr Trump as 'lying'? (For instance, about the result of the 2020 election.)
In the UK, the Guardian routinely does this and I find it highly irritating. I want my news sources simply to report what a politician is saying. It's not their job to to tell me whether he is lying. I'll decide that for myself, thank you very much.
It's a deeply worrying example of the way that news sources that used to claim to be objective, and I think did genuinely strive to achieve that, have allowed themselves to fall into naked partisanship in recent years. The stubborn protection of Mr Biden was another example, until the extent of his frailty became undeniable.
I am perplexed by this idea that the media have been “protecting” Biden. The media have been absolutely hammering him on his age for a long time now, much more so than Trump. The New York Times have had over 80 articles in the last month that are wholly or largely focussed on Biden’s age and suitability to run. The media and large donors have had a bigger role in pushing out Biden than anyone. A majority of grassroots voters (and the likes of Bernie/AOC) wanted to keep him. |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Jul 22, 2024 12:47:48 GMT
The media treats Trump as they do Farage: protective, publicised, supporting. Our right wing media always protect their own.
|
|
