I can not believe what I'm reading on this board right now in regards to Joe...

[TCJ70]

...“Republicans will work with me” Biden. Has everyone supporting him forgotten the last decade? Did you forget:
- Republicans prioritizing stonewalling everything?
- A stolen Supreme Court seat?
- McConnel filibustering his own bill to avoid Obama signing it?
- 8 or so Benghazi investigations that all showed nothing?
- Ted Cruz reading Green Eggs & Ham unironically in a filibuster because he doesn’t like new things?
- Overriding a presidential veto and blaming Obama for the bill forced through for having a negative outcome?
- Republicans blocking information from the House Intel Committee in regards to the Special Counsel?

These aren’t people who act in good faith anymore. We have a candidate who is now saying he believes these people will walk away from everything they’ve proved themselves to be for 10 years and work with him? Why would they?

Suggesting this is possible is a flat out rejection of reality and history. It also opens the door for Republicans to do to him what they did to Obama. “Sure we’ll work with you. We definitely won’t put on a show and then yank out the football!”

I would think it would be immediately disqualifying for a candidate around here.

[dalton99a]

1. "My Republican friends"

[leftofcool]

2. Call me silly but I thought a President was a President of all of America

I may not be supporting Joe in the primary but how does reaching out to the other side disqualify him as a candidate? Beto does it, Mayor Pete does it and if the rest of them were smart, they would reach out to the other side as well.

[TCJ70]

5. Reaching out is one thing...

...inviting someone to come along and help out is great. It’s also not what he said.

Expecting Republicans to help him achieve anything is completely ridiculous. That’s what he said.

[dalton99a]

6. And primaries are not when you want to appease or normalize Republicans

[Hortensis]

33. Sure it is. You call for division and

hostility. You’re not following that with a call for “Death to Democracy,” but that’d be at the end of the path you do call for.

Those who study fallen republics have discovered they were torn apart by factions that fight each other and refused to work together. We have been brought dangerously far along that road right now by those trying to destroy our democracy. VP Biden knows that, of course.

On the bright side for you perhaps, if you can stomach it, fascism is right up the alley of those who despise cooperation. You would need to change sides, though. There is literally no such thing as liberal fascism.

[TCJ70]

37. "Call for division"? No. A division already exists. A response appropriate for the times...

...to that division is what I'm talking about. Warm fuzzies and expectations about working with Republicans because they've seen the light or magically turned some corner because he's president is really out there. Cooperation is great...if the people you're trying to cooperate have a history of acting in good faith. The Republicans have a solid decade long history of not doing that and are so far from that, though.

[Hortensis]

39. You again made my point. Please stop.

Biden and other Democrats are working to protect and save our democracy. They will not be taking the road to guaranteed destruction.

By the way, you apparently don’t know it, but the parties still work together to pass some legislation every session, just not on issues so divisive that it’d be reported and embarrass the Republicans with their base. Same for red states.

Our democracy is gravely injured and crippled by the destructive divisions of partisanship for its own sake but far from its deathbed.

[Demit]

43. If the parties work together to pass some legislation now, presumably they still will.

So Biden being president would have no bearing on that.
But the divisive issues you mention—the ones that embarrass the Republicans with their base if they compromise—what would change there, with Biden as president?

[Hortensis]

49. :) I imagine somewhat similar to Obama's DC if

we didn't get control of congress with any Democratic candidate. If we held the house there would be some significant differences, but McConnell still promises scorched earth from the senate if they hold it.

But NO Democratic candidate with a chance of winning would be so insanely incompetent, or so completely unprincipled, as to gratify the demands of this OP. The president must serve all Americans.

Sanders is not among them, but even his presidency would be strongly formed by the realities of its context, and cooperating with Republicans, even occasionally against the Democratic caucus, is not exactly unusual for him. I'm guessing the author would see Elizabeth Warren as far less likely to try to work with Republicans than Biden, but if so that'd be out of pure ignorance of her history in congress and misunderstanding of what it takes to be effective.

[Demit]

58. But Biden's claim is that Republicans will have an epiphany, and be more cooperative, once he is

president. That is a marvelous claim. Especially as they are afraid of their base, as you point out.

It would be nice if Republicans suddenly became open to compromise on previously divisive issues, it surely would. I have trouble picturing it happening, though. What I can picture is Biden doing all the compromising, all the reaching across the aisle.

Democrats retaking control of the Senate PLUS winning the White House might get Republicans to rediscover the benefits of compromise. Might. Otherwise, you have the same old Republicans playing to their same old base, not budging from their same old ideology, a President Biden notwithstanding.

[Hortensis]

63. Come on, Demit. He's far from an idiot. Take it in context.

Of all our crises, I believe, as experts around the planet do, the RW threat to our 250-year-old democracy is easily most imminent and serious. If it is to survive, a certain percentage of conservative voters will have to renounce the increasingly fascistic goals fronted by the Republican leadership in favor of commitment to the America we all grew up in. Enough to overcome the advantages of the electoral college and corruption of elections.

Biden's promising to do what a president can to help to form a majority to stand against the RW extremists acting through the Republicans in government.

He's not my favorite ideologically, I've always been well left of him, but I believe the statesmanlike but familiar and easygoing, all-American sort of warm fuzzies he projects is a big reason for favoring him. So far most of the others have been talking liberal and progressive policies as if there were no grave danger that absolutely none of them would be enacted by a fascistic RW government, and I was waiting and hoping Biden would use his stature to address America's identity and future. And he is.

[Demit]

64. I don't know what context I'm supposed to take "Republicans will have an epiphany" in.

Biden is referring to members of Congress there, not voters. I wonder which of his "Republican friends" he's counting on to do this volte-face? Hopefully he'll make it clearer in coming months exactly what he plans to do to bring it about. Hopefully he's not banking solely on easygoing warm fuzziness. That's great for lulling voters into feeling a sense of security, but it's not exactly proven effective for combatting imminent fascism.

[Hortensis]

65. Just looked and realized you're more than a little

"hipped" on the Biden subject. Live and learn. Now, if only I could remember!

[Perseus]

18. Because at what point you realize you need to be realistic, to wake up to the truth?

At what point do you realize that the "party of trump" is not interested in govern, is not interested in policies that will help the country, is not interested in bipartisanship, is not interested in preserving the rule of law, is not interested in allowing a Democrat who reaches the presidency to govern and do the right thing, and I can go on, and on.

If a candidate is that naive he doesn't deserve my vote. Joe was VP when Obama was president, has he forgotten McConnell's first statement when Obama and Joe won the presidency in 2008? Has he forgotten McConnell's first statement when they won the 2nd term? Come on! until when Democrats are going to play stupid?

I am very frustrated that Democrats don't seem to learn, they always seem to play the coward when confronting those in the party of trump. The latest example? Don Jr agrees to testify, but only on his terms. He is going to list the questions he will answer, and he will have limited time where he can run around the bush not answering questions, wasting time and his interrogation producing zero information of interest or truth. There was a subpoena issued against Jr, he should not be able to make demands, either he shows up? or he goes to jail, period. It is infuriating that Democrats can't have balls...I am so angry about all this, I am so tired of the blah, blah, blah..."we will weigh all options", "we will use all the tools at our disposal"...when? when is that going to happen?

Enough! For Joe to say that the party of trump will work with him is disingenuous, not sure who he is trying to fool.

I think we need a concerted effort, everyone needs to write to the Democrats and let them know how frustrated we are, how weak they look by not forcing people to comply with subpoenas. I sent Kamala Harris an email, and vented my frustration, I also said I refuse to donate a penny until I see real forceful action from Democrats. We are going to get to 2020 elections with nothing accomplished, the Muller report will still be redacted, Barr will send subpoenas to Democrats, and be sure they will jail those who do not comply, although I expect Democrats will comply, and FBI agents from their investigation on the investigation...This is going downhill, we all need to wake up.

[mr_lebowski]

3. I don't think he's dumb enough to believe that, ergo I'm not naive enough to think he means it

It's reasonably smart politics, and the goal is 'trying to tip a handful of GOP voters his way, more than he tips Democratic voters the other way'.

I'd say it's a safe gambit/angle to take, when you're not talking specific policies that Democratic voters would find anathema.

Just MHO.

[Demit]

44. If you don't think he means it, what makes you think GOP voters will?

[Skya Rhen]

47. Some GOP voters will believe it and some won't so he will get votes

from those that believe it. That’s not a bad thing - actually it’s pretty smart of him.

[Demit]

50. GOP voters aren't voters in the Democratic primaries. Biden has to win those first.

Appealing to Republican voters now, before winning the Democratic nomination, is an odd strategy.

[First Speaker]

4. I don't think Biden is less aware of any of this than we are...

...but I do think he's using this kind of rhetoric to appeal to residually-sane Repubs and Independents. If he can get some to vote for him next year, he feels he'll cross that bridge--GOP obstruction--when he comes to it.

[jalan48]

7. So we're going back to reaching across the aisle to find consensus?

[Skya Rhen]

8. Joe is an experienced, seasoned politician - he is playing chess and I defer to him...

[TCJ70]

9. You're right. He is experienced...

...as in he experienced everything I referenced from the vantage point of the White House. How come he wasn’t able to get them to work with him and Obama back then?

[Skya Rhen]

11. Because Obama is black - little Joe could have done to change the Repubs bigotry...

[TCJ70]

12. Are you saying they would have voted for the ACA if Obama had been white? N/t

[Skya Rhen]

15. Perhaps. Its framework was supported by the GOP's Heritage Foundation and when a black man

dared to throw his support behind it, they suddenly acted as if it was the plague.

So they were against it after a black man was for it...

[mr_lebowski]

22. It was indeed ... originally emerged from the GOP Bowels, and basically the same as RomneyCare ...

The GOP loved the tenets of the ACA ... before they hated it. Though I'm not sure the turnaround was based on Obama's skin color, I tend to think it was more to do with his political affiliation.

[BeyondGeography]

13. McConnell is already calling him a socialist

Biden sounds oblivious.

[Skya Rhen]

16. Unfortunately for McConnell, the polls show otherwise. The voters are pulling for a moderate and he

knows that. But McConnell is desperately trying to see what sticks and clearly it is not working.

That title belongs squarely with Bernie, AOC, et al. And remember, that crew and a good chunk of the left is currently upset with Joe because he is not embracing their form of socialism.

So, McConnell fails and everyone knows it...

[applegrove]

10. Admittedly GOP are running a racket but I think they were more afraid

of Obama because he is black and very likeable. They had to make sure he didn't connect to the base or their southern strategy would suffer.

[LibDemAlways]

14. Reaching across the aisle and

making nice with R's is a non-starter. Any Democrat who honestly believes the current crop of Repukes have any interest in bipartisanship is delusional. I get that Biden is trying to appeal to whatever moderate R's are out there, but he must know that working productively with McConnell & Co. probably has worse odds than winning the Powerball. Will never happen.

[Skya Rhen]

17. If it doesn't happen then it doesn't happen - nothing in life is guaranteed. We all know that...

[More_Cowbell]

21. We all have the right to say what we think, regardless of what happens

I'm not worried about Biden reaching out to GOP voters. I definitely think he's the candidate who might make some GOP voters cross. I just don't think it will be many. And I don't think it will be for any office but the President. They'll still vote for their hateful representatives.

His statements worry me because I think that GOP *candidates* will benefit. Biden is treating GOP congress people as if they're under a spell that will break if he's elected. I believe that that's a message that GOP candidates will use to their advantage. "You can vote for us; we'll be reasonable under another President. Biden says so."

I'm worried that Biden's "GOP politicians will be okay if I'm president" message is minimizing the terrible things that GOP politicians have done and will continue to do.

We need to vote them ALL out.

The fact that Biden has the best chance to win Pennsylvania just makes me more angry that 3 states control every election.

[ancianita]

19. ANYONE here who says Biden's naive or ridiculous forgets that he had SIGNED co-sponsored legislation

over the years, and I can list those bipartisan co-sponsored bills that were SIGNED INTO LAW.

I especially don't want to read this crap:

Suggesting this is possible is a flat out rejection of reality and history. It also opens the door for Republicans to do to him what they did to Obama. “Sure we’ll work with you. We definitely won’t put on a show and then yank out the football!”

I would think it would be immediately disqualifying for a candidate around here.

Know what that is? Here's what it is:

Support Democrats -- Do not post anything that smears Democrats generally, or that is intended to dissuade people from supporting the Democratic Party or its candidates.

Don't bash Democratic public figures
Do not post anything that could be construed as bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for any Democratic general election candidate...

So flat out stop it.

[BlueMTexpat]

24. While I concur with your message about

NOT bashing Dems, it is in fact some of this "bipartisan legislation" that Joe was part of that sticks in my own craw and why he is NOT one of my preferred candidates. See, e.g., https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-biden-senate-record-controversies-20190318-story.html

Truth-telling is NOT bashing and this article seems generally even-handed. But it does NOT reduce my own qualms about his candidacy.

That said, I will of course support him if he is the nominee. ABT to the nth power!!!!

Btw, my elder son LOVES your candidate!

[ancianita]

51. I was foregrounding whichever word applies in the rules. I consider this talk "undermining."

[TCJ70]

34. If you feel there is something seriously wrong with my post...

...there’s an alert button at the bottom of it that anyone can click. I’ve been around long enough to be quite familiar with the rules here and don’t need a reminder, thank you.

[ancianita]

52. Apparently, you do. You're not the only poster here who needs reminding.

[TCJ70]

56. I see you have Inslee as your preferred candidate...

...and his campaign is primarily focused on climate change. What kind of legislation do you expect to get out of Republicans who will magically work with Biden that takes meaningful action on that front? You know...the same people who rail against any environmental regulation of any kind and have for decades?

[ancianita]

70. I wrote lengthy descriptions of both Inslee's executive and Biden's legislative work previously.

(Sorry for the delay. Comcast tech wiped out my lengthy reply to you an hour ago while upgrading my Internet and cable system. I can't now remember what I wrote, but will try.)

The issue, as I see it, is that Biden has loong standing political relationships with members of the current Republican Senate, and better than anyone, by being in good standing with their previous bipartisan work, get traction on their cooperation going forward.

The Republicans' well-deserved stereotype will still diminish through the work they swore an oath to do, and there are exceptions to our stereotype -- why? Because we really don't know ALL their hearts and minds. Some are willingly complicit in the current legal tricks and traps their party leaders want to use, others are unwillingly so.

Refusing to trust Repubs is well deserved. They brought this on themselves, with malice and forethought or no. However. We cannot and must not succumb to their habit of zero sum thinking, politically, about our own candidates in relation to how Repubs operate.

The zero sum thinking I've seen around here won't serve to really arm us against this corrupt president in the general. Every flaw he can find we will have to have a counter-blow to. We are not what we are called. We are what we answer to.

We have great, great candidates with vision, skills and accomplishments that we here need to simultaneously promote with "AND" language, not "BUT" language.

Because one candidate stands out in one issue or policy should not imply that the others are not as committed to promoting what s/he favors in our own respective candidates. Already I see others taking up Inslee's priorities on climate change, and I applaud them for it. Inslee doesn't "own" the issue. It's all our issue.

Biden's strength from his past Senate work, as I see it, hits the ground running as a "forced capacity rebuilding" of bipartisanship among the Repub senators who themselves want credit.

They want credit. Not just money. Credit with their constituents is more important than some "cover" story or pandering. To move forward, work with a new Democratic president like Biden, maybe a stronger Democratic senate, is how they get that credit. People like bipartisanship. It feels rational and right. With Biden, they can more likely get credit back home as pragmatic bipartisans, not comrade refuseniks like McConnell who, even as we speak, and unknown to most of his constituents, has Oleg Deripaska setting up shop in Kentucky.

We are much, much better than the zero sum inclinations I've read here. I am not ridiculous or naive about them.

I expect the promotion of our candidates to be devoid of all that "but" and comparison language and be solid with the factual supports we can marshal on their behalf for the country, so people will believe we stand more FOR their interests than AGAINST their reps as opponents.

This is about demonstrating living constructively with difference, which is the heart of Democracy and governing.

[Demit]

41. Your second TOS point concerns general election candidates, not primary candidates.

And your pull quote doesn't violate the first TOS, either. It's not smearing Democrats generally.

[ancianita]

53. I think "undermining" is one of the words in the rule. "Generally" isn't at issue here. It's

specifically one Democratic candidate.

[Demit]

60. "Undermining," in the second rule you quote, is clearly referring to the general election.

So it doesn't pertain to the primaries. It is not relevant here.

The rule you quote—"Support Democrats -- Do not post anything that smears Democrats generally, or that is intended to dissuade people from supporting the Democratic Party or its candidates"— is clearly referring to the party in general. It doesn't apply here either, as you now note.

In other words, it doesn't violate DU rules to be critical of a Democratic candidate in a primary election.

[zipplewrath]

77. Well you could

I can list those bipartisan co-sponsored bills that were SIGNED INTO LAW.

But if you do, you might find that those bills aren't all that popular around here. You can start with the bankruptcy bill.

[ancianita]

85. Go ahead. List the rest that are unpopular here.

[comradebillyboy]

20. It's a message that resonates with he broader electorate...

That being said I don't believe the Republicans will cooperate unless they get a severe trashing at the polls or until Mitch McConnell is gone.

[mr_lebowski]

23. Agreed ... I'd be disturbed if I thought he honestly believes the GOP will 'work with him'

At least, on anything that they wouldn't 'work with' ANY Democrat-authored Bill/Policy (i.e. something they already like).

But I don't think Joe is that naive.

[emulatorloo]

25. I cannot believe you wrote this post. An informative post about your preferred candidate would be

very very useful.

Attacking your fellow DU’ers isn’t very useful in the context of this forum.

We are trying to decide who to support. A great post about your candidate would be helpful to those who are undecided.

Of course your mileage may very.

[RelativelyJones]

26. +1000

[TCJ70]

29. Like you, I'm undecided. I don't have a preferred candidate yet...

...but after this I have one who has moved significantly down my list.

[emulatorloo]

88. Well pick out a candidate you might support and write something positive then

Rather than tearing down others.

Honestly all our candidates share the same core values and the goal of lifting up the 99%.

They all want to reverse the egregiousdamage Trump has done: locking up kids and separating them from their parents, lifting up White Supremicists, keeping transsexuals from serving in the military, destroying the middle class with this ridiculous “tax reform”, destroying the State Department, cozying up to dictators and shitting on our allies. destroying our National Parks by allowing them to be desecrated during his Wall shutdowns, and on and on and on.

My focus is destroying Trump.

I am not here to destroy Democrats who want the best for the most vulnerable members of our society, to lift up the 99%, to shut down white suppremists and support civil rights.

So I hope you will take the time to right a series of OP’s that lift up the Democratic candidates you might get behind. You have serious writing skills and you are a very thoughtful person. So I know that I for one would get a lot out of any positive candidate profile you would produce.

[aikoaiko]

67. I appreciate the OP.

There are lots of posts on DU describing what they don’t like about other candidates or their supporters.

I dont know why Joe and his squad should be treated differently.

[underpants]

27. You, in my opinion, are skipping over one important fact

If Trump goes down they splinter. They are beholden to him but mostly Fox News. They have waaaay out elements in their party from the "Freedom Caucus" to what we saw just yesterday in Al Abama.

Some will have to come back closer to the fold. It's the natural order of things and Joe (especially with a big win) would be the guy they could use to justify their actions.

[stonecutter357]

28. you seem very concerned !

[TCJ70]

31. I am concerned...

...I’m concerned that a large portion of voters have lined up behind someone who doesn’t see the Republicans for what they are. What does that mean for seeing meaningful action on healthcare and climate change?

[hlthe2b]

30. I'm so damned tired of the Biden attacks. Who do you think you are convincing?

Forty Percent of us are undecided--as are a large proportion of Americans, including former Obama voters who voted for Your attacks on Biden for "being too old" or "changing his views over the past DECADES" or "for suggesting he would "TRY to unite the country by reaching out to Republicans" (who opt to return to sanity) are so obvious.

Do you really think you are convincing ANYONE? Any more than Trump's attacks on Biden?

Discuss your own candidate's relative strengths. If you can't do so, then the alternative is not to continually attack Biden or any other Dem candidate. You need to do your own homework if you are undecided, but your only urge is to attack candidates rather than DISCUSS your favored ones. Continually attacking a single Dem candidate is VERY REVEALING and many of us would be forgiven for suspecting your motives in doing so.

[TCJ70]

32. Hello, fellow undecided.

I haven’t gone after him for being too old (or anyone for their age), or for changing his views (in fact, I’d love it if some of his past views have changed), or for reaching out to Republicans (inviting people to come alongside and help is great...but it’s also not what we’re talking about here).

His stated belief that’s Republicans will magically turn some corner, see the light, and do a 180 from what they’ve done for a decade is weird.

I make my decisions in primaries primarily based on policy and who I think will push hardest to get the closest to the goals that align with mine. It worries me what his viewpoint means for meaningful action on healthcare and climate change when he sees people who voted 60+ times to repeal the ACA and vote repeatedly to destroy the environment as potential allies.

[Deb]

35. Republican Governors have natural disasters

What kind of leader would ignore that?

[TCJ70]

36. What are you talking about? Who's talking about natural disaster response? n/t

[Raven123]

38. IMO he is trying to appeal to those GOP voters who want someone other than Trump.

He is doing his best to avoid giving them an excuse to stay home on election day. Given Trump’s narrow margin in those few critical states, he doesn’t need to sway a lot of voters.

That’s part of his epiphany plan. He believes that if he can get himself elected, he will give the GOP members of Congress a reason to stop their Trumpian behavior.

I am not saying he will be successful. Frankly 8 years as VP should make him wary.

[Autumn]

40. I can't believe after him being in the Obama administration he thinks the problem is Trump and not

the Republicans. It's stunning to me that he can even consider that. He was fucking there. He knew what they were doing then, he knows what they are doing now. We will all be dead and the planet destroyed while waiting for those fuckers to have an epiphany

[TCJ70]

57. He had a front row view of what I, at the time, considered the worst of their descent into...

...obstructionist nonsense (then 2016 happened). Why couldn't he get them to work with him then? What was he doing for 8 years? Withholding his mystical presence that will hypnotize Republicans into compliance?

[Autumn]

59. Having fun with all the "bad ass" memes being made about him? I just want to know why

he thinks they will have his epiphany. Another poster posted this about AOC's GND but I think it fits this fantasy of an epiphany much better.

[Peacetrain]

42. And this is why VP Joe Biden will win this thing..

Because he is giving people a way out of the cult of Trump..

[TCJ70]

45. He's currently sitting at 91% approval among Republicans in the latest Gallup polls...

...so I'm not sure where all these people who want a way out are. Also, there were 10+ ways out in their 2016 primaries. That'd didn't seem to matter.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx

[Peacetrain]

46. We get 9 % if Republicans and we walk away with this thing!!

We will lose it all if we are only going to address those who already agree with us.. It worked for Trump and look at the hell we are in right now.. that is not a model we want to follow..

[LAS14]

48. I think this theme was a bad choice for Biden. He should have stopped with "I'll work across...

... the aisle." To go further sounds like he was asleep through the whole Obama administration.... creeping senility??? I expect some will alert me for this, but it is a serious concern on my part. I'm 75 and have good grounds for worry about age. Surely we should be able to talk about facts of life.

[Crepuscular]

54. days of old

I fear that Joe is pining for a return to the old days of Collegiality in the Senate, where members could respectively debate an issue on the floor and then go out for drinks together that evening. Those days are gone, the ideological and partisan divides in this country are too deep and the impact of instant news/ social media/ endless talking heads driving narratives all insure that bi-partisanship has become a relic of the days of old. We need a candidate that acknowledges the current status quo and who can navigate the political landscape based on current conditions, not on an old school vision of what existed in the past, when politics was largely conducted as a private gentleman's club, with a membership made up exclusively of old white men.

[Demit]

62. "when politics was largely conducted as a private gentleman's club" perfectly encapsulates

what Joe Biden yearns for, in my view. Nice writing. Nice post!

[Skya Rhen]

66. We need a candidate that can win, first, and Joe is the man...

[Crepuscular]

79. we shall see

Joe has not won or even come close in his previous two runs at the presidency. Lets see how he does in the debates before we leap to the conclusion that he is the only one in the field capable of beating trump, that seems to be a very premature conclusion based on little actual evidence. The Democratic party has been moving in the proper direction by energizing youth and increasing voter turnout among younger demographics, it appears that Joe's current support comes mainly from those middle aged and older. Unless he can increase his popularity among younger democrats and independents, we risk seeing a certain percentage of the younger vote either staying home or going third party. Whether that would be enough to get trump re-elected, it's hard to say. While I'm sure I will get bashed for Ageism (I'm closing in on 60) I have a hard time seeing Joe running for a second term at 81. Even if he selects a dynamic, younger running mate, if he is seen as a single term candidate, he automatically becomes a lame duck on election eve, which is going to make passing his agenda that much harder. At some point, it's time to pass the torch on to a new generation. My opinion is that we are at such a crossroads but as I said time will tell.

[still_one]

55. I would think what should immediately disqualify a candidate around here, is a candidate that

hires people in their campaign that not only voted for Jill Stein in the general election, but encouraged others to do likewise up to the day before the election

[aikoaiko]

68. Everyone gets a chance at redemption with the new election cycle.

[still_one]

71. Grey has absolutely no remose for voting for Jill Stein. She is proud of it. My response was

to the OP who setup a litmus test for whoever our candidate is, it should "disqualify them", so I thought it only fair to setup another litmus test right back at the OP

[Skya Rhen]

69. ...which greatly contributed to Trump's win which then led to longterm, harmful right wing policies

being implemented. I am sure that these folks are quite pleased with themselves. Seriously.

[still_one]

72. Grey is proud of it, and has no remorse, and has said so in her twitter feeds. At least she is

honest, unlike David Sirota, who busily removed all his twitter feeds so there was no evidence of his undermining of the Democratic nominee in 2016. Too bad for him though that enough folks captured enough of his posts before he erased them that he can't deny it.

If some want to play the litmus game, I'll play the litmus test right back at em

[peggysue2]

61. LOL!!

I would think it would be immediately disqualifying for a candidate around here.


Sorry, no! But nice try

[NYMinute]

73. ...

[TCJ70]

74. He said it yesterday...

...that's far from dead horse territory.

[NYMinute]

75. You are not going to sway a single Biden supporter

away from this to support Bernie.

That is why it is beating a dead horse.

Lucy Flores - failed badly.
Crossing a non-existent picket line - failed miserably.
Anita Hill brouhaha - failed badly.
Biden against busing - tanked splendidly.
Working with republicans - failing miserably.

Reality is, people just don't like Bernie and his crowd. People like Biden and you are not going to make them dislike him unless they see him torturing puppies on live television.

However, some people are optimistic and think the horse would wake up.

[TCJ70]

76. "I can't really respond to to defend this ridiculous thing Biden said...

...I KNOW! I'll bring up Bernie. That'll show 'em!"

[Skya Rhen]

80. New Quinnipiac poll, Pennsylvania: Biden 39%, Sanders 13%, Harris 8%, Warren 8%

This is the type of results that occur when an experienced statesman knows how to run a campaign, the right way. This should be a learning moment for others...

Oh, I forgot this one:

New head-to-head 2020 poll numbers in Pennsylvania via Quinnipiac:

Biden 53%, Trump 42%
Sanders 50%, Trump 43%
Warren 47%, Trump 44%
Buttigieg 45%, Trump 44%
Harris 45%, Trump 45%
Trump 46%, O'Rourke 44

[TCJ70]

81. What in the world does this have to do with Biden thinking his mere presence...

...will somehow entrance the Republicans into working with him on anything?

[Skya Rhen]

82. Joe is a very gracious man which is why he is so beloved. Why would you misstate

his words to make him sound self-serving. So that he can be cast in a negative light?

You said that Biden thinks that his "mere presence will somehow entrance the Republicans into working with him..."
.
This is his statement, below (verbatim). Please point out exactly where he ever once referred to himself. I will wait on your response.

*********************************************************************************************************

Former Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday he expects Republicans will have an "epiphany" when President Donald Trump leaves office, and will embrace working with Democratic colleagues.

"I just think there is a way, and the thing that will fundamentally change things is with Donald Trump out of the White House. Not a joke. You will see an epiphany occur among many of my Republican friends," Biden said during a campaign stop in New Hampshire. "It's already beginning in the House now... If we can't change, we're in trouble. This nation cannot function without generating consensus. It can't do it."

Biden launched his campaign in April with a video announcement featuring staunchly anti-Trump rhetoric, classifying the 2020 election as a "battle for the soul of this nation." He also said if Trump won another four years in the White House, that he would "forever and fundamentally alter the character of this nation."

"What happens is if you can't generate consensus under our system of separated powers, all the power moves to the executive," Biden said Tuesday. "It gives excuses then to say I'm going to enact by executive order to do something because nothing's getting done. That's the president and his team's whole rationale for what they're doing."

[LongtimeAZDem]

86. Who would have thought that "we can work together" would be such a caustic sentiment?

[TCJ70]

92. "We can work together" isn't caustic if the people you're working have shown to work in good faith

Republicans haven't shown that they're capable of it for over a decade and if Biden goes into things thinking Republicans are going to be cooperative friends of his I worry for what kind of action we're going to see on climate change and healthcare for his potential term in office.

[Skya Rhen]

93. TCJ70 - I am still waiting for you to correct the false statements that you attributed to Joe...

Namely, 'Republicans will work with me” Biden' (Post #1)

and 'Biden thinks that his "mere presence will somehow entrance the Republicans into working with him..." ' (Post #81)

What Joe actually said was:

'he expects Republicans will have an "epiphany" when President Donald Trump leaves office, and will embrace working with Democratic colleagues.'

He did not refer to "himself"

I would suggest that you edit the aforementioned posts to correctly reflect that Joe, in fact, did not refer to himself:

I trust that you will do the right thing...

[earthshine]

78. You are the one bringing up Bernie here and taking his name in vain.

I am still undecided.

Joe keeps dropping for me every day, partly due to the issues you have just mentioned.

[NYMinute]

83. Cool story bro

[DemocratSinceBirth]

84. If paeans to bipartisanship help Scranton Joe get elected so be it.

I might think it's naive but the polling suggest that's what most voters want.

[earthshine]

87. Obviously, you have nothing of value to say. nt

[Autumn]

96. You are right on track

[Saviolo]

89. A twitter thread that crossed my timeline today:

Link to tweet

David Rothkopf
?
@djrothkopf

What "normal" will the GOP return to after Trump? The Mitch McConnell normal that kept Merrick Garland off the court? The normal of the Georgia or Alabama GOP attacks on a woman's right to choose? The normal of the Republicans who defended Trump's racism and crimes?

And a link to the whole unrolled thread here:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1128675198901923841.html

[TCJ70]

90. That's my question, as well. This "normalcy" talk...

...Biden had a front row seat for what the Republicans are all about. What normalcy do people see coming from Biden?

[ucrdem]

91. You mean the polls?

Encouraging aren't they?

p.s. it's a strategy and if the numbers can be trusted it's working.

[cynatnite]

94. Pretty sure Joe hasn't forgotten how the repubs treated Obama...

He's not a stupid man.

Of course, he's going to do the "reaching out" speech, but I have no doubt he gets what the repubs did to Obama and won't ever forget it.

[LongtimeAZDem]

95. Exactly right