The Joe Biden Presidency II : He's too old...or something like that!

Come on, man. Don't be a punch line.

At least we can take solace that you didn't try to blame his disastrous performance on a stutter.

 

You should watch more. He looked tired, with a cold, and overcoached to the point where he had no idea what he was supposed to say.

 

If Donald Fücking Trump is telling you to be more mature (and he's right) then something has gone catastrophically wrong.

 

I watched plenty and came away with that conclusion. Doesn't mean we should be freaking out.

 

I've had to lecture for 1-2 hours non-stop when I've had a cold plenty of times. It wasn't an issue at all.

 

To the people in the grey states, who haven't decided yet, who are "low information voters" who vote for "who they want to have a beer with" that was terrible. We should be freaking out.

https://www.270towin.com/

 

A debate, in late June, isn't going to sway low information voters.

 

I think changing the candidate is a major news event, like the debate performance. If you don't want to hear, you will hear about and then what will those who have not paid attention think? Why so late? Wtf is going on with the Dems? And now we have to change the narrative. Good luck with that.

 

Anyone and everyone who has dealt with parents or grandparents in their 80s will understand what is going on.

edit: For me, the fear of what is takes precedence over the fear of what if.

 

Really? What do you think they saw on the news and heard at the water cooler (from their MAGA friends)?

 

Just the other day I was talking with my brother about the twist at the end of Karateka where after you fought everybody and their mom to get to the princess, she would kill you with one blow if you approached her in a fighting stance.

Harsh lessons learned early in life I guess.

 

I still hate that bird.

 

I mean, to labour that point again, it would be...

• Donald Trump
• Donald Trump
• Donald Trump

But, with respect, (and this goes to tigers point), I don't think that's the question. I think the question they seem to be struggling to make the argument about is 'WHY Joe Biden'?... if he seems to be lacking the mental acuity to do the job.

Interestingly there was a discussion about the matter on BBC Newsnight and one of the guests was Meghan Kelly. Now I wouldn't normally repeat anything she has to say ad she's mostly a right-wing shill and hack of the worst kind.

But there was something she said that was an interesting point and, regardless of who said it the question needs addressing.

One of the other guests asked why the moderators don't fact check Trump, (and Biden obviously), when they're speaking in the debate and she made the point that, when Trump and Biden are interviewed by the media, that's their hob... to ask the tough questions. I mean, they don't do much of that with Trump anyway... I realise that.

But as she pointed out, during these debates, that's the candidates jobs. They're meant to be debating, (and arguing), with each other. If one of them can't do it in the debate, that's not the media's problem... that's the candidates.

 

When we discussed the brexit referendum before the vote people were confused as to how the leave campaign could hope to win when they had at least 3 different versions of brexit they wanted to push.

I wasn't so sure because I realised that, as you suggest, that was a 'feature' of the leave case... that people could pick the arguments they wanted to believe.

In a sense that's slightly different because we could have left the EU and still been closely aligned so it might have only been a minor adjustment* whereas with a presidential election you either get Trump or you get Biden. IOW people know what they're going to get.


* Although, obviously, wtf was the point of the exercise then but that's another matter.

 

One of the things that started, but seems to be abandoned, is providing an answer to the "are you better off now than 4 years ago" question by highlighting what the Orange fascist was doing 4 years ago. I think that was effective and should continue.



edit: I just did that for July 16, 2020 and it was quite interesting. One part, however, was very depressing:

 

Thank you!! This is what I have been saying. There's no way to make this switch without the Democrats signaling weakness and depressed just feasting and eating up any and every ability for this new candidate to get their message out

 

Has it ever occurred to anyond else here that maybe this is what and who America really is, and Trump just made it visible in ways that were ignored by many a generation or so ago?

248 years, maybe 30 of them commendable. I'm not sure the math validates our opinion of ourselves.

 

@Sounders78. If you want stuff to do that is radical attract the young, this is what you do

BREAKING WAPO:

President Biden is finalizing plans to endorse major changes to the Supreme Court in the coming weeks — including proposals for legislation to establish term limits for the justices and an enforceable ethics code, according to two people briefed on the plans.…

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) July 16, 2024

 

I'd be curious to see how important an issue that is for the young.

 

Not just the young. Independents of any age will be completely behind this. Its far better approach to attract voters on the margins than stacking the courts in either direction.

 

That is absolute bull shit though and no surprise it is coming from Megan Kelly. The opposing candidate can challenge an idea or a concept but he can’t and should not have to to fact check the torrent of egregious lies from his opponent. That is the role of the moderators they are not just there to pose for picture. Their job is to ensure that the debate stays factual and is not an exercise of propaganda.

 

Well, as I said, she's not really the one to be holding opinions on this stuff for the reasons we all know.

But, fair enough... the problem is, of course...

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/t6LPfZBbV-8

If he didn't want to to do it with that format he should have said he'd only do it in another format where the moderators would be able to criticise Trump and correct his false statements.

If Trump wouldn't do it then he could have said he's afraid to hold a 'fair' debate.

I think this is the problem. If he could have handled the situation better then we wouldn't have a issue. it's been caused because of how ineffective he was... not because the dems are 'scared' or 'bed-wetters'.