Joe Biden defense thread

[Draco Dracul]

It's not going to benefit me directly so I'm not going to lift a figure to make anything better or even to stop things from getting worse is exactly the kind of moral cowardice I'm talking about. You say you do it for your principlce while standing for nothing but your own benefit. You're DJ from The Last Jedi.

That's you putting words into my mouth, and I do NOT appreciate that. Political entrenchment is not something which can be fought overnight, and frankly the hypocrisy from the left turns me off if they are the ones to guide us into this apparent bright future they see on the horizon. It seems more you're collective shaming, which is a tried-and-true tactic to the left. Blame people for not getting involved, when it's so hard to get any kind of meaningful change done, when the rich get richer, the powerful seize more power, and the cruel become nastier, that it's all too easy to wonder what contribution you will make.

It's hard to get meaningful change done because people like you are willing to sit on the side lines as things get worse and worse. I mean you're complaining about the things that the left wants to stop. Especially when you want to not fight the face of the rights push toward wanton cruelty is up for reelection.

Well, I know what contribution I'll be making. You can be active in community in other ways past electoral voting on candidates I find to be wanting. Even if I couldn't help out all the time, I gave to charities to help out in relief efforts for Hurricane Sandy, the Flint, Michigan water crisis, and a few more. I volunteer at soup kitchens, when I am able to. Plus as I have noted before, when others were disregarding warnings and COVID-19 hit the beaches, I did not. I stayed at home, however tempting it might have been to do the same thing. I would do more if not for the fact the economy is taking a hit and I want to ride it out until we get to the other end. Gotta look after my family now.

You can, but it's like renovating a home without fixing the cracked foundation first. You might make something's better, but you're work will be for naught because you are letting the problem get worse and worse.

Four more years of Trump means no progressive legislation for an entire generation because it will mean a 6-3 court. It will mean more disasters like the one we are living through now. It will mean more and more of the state apparatus warped to sole attack the enemies of Trump and by extension the Republican party. You're justifying your apathy by making a standard so high for action that all of histories greatest monsters combined would not reach it.

Mr. 45 is not going to end the world in four years. He is merely doubling down on the way American culture has been moving for decades.

Only if you define the right wing as the only american culture, and the american right wing has spent 50 years moving hard to the right to the point where doubling down on it means actively engaging in fascistic rhetoric, which trump is currently engaged in.

Besides, Mr. 45 is the most heavily criticized president on cable news channels like CNN and MSNBC, so I really don't get what your point. I am not apathetic, as I have proven above. I just don't define an ability to forge change with the highest levels of power.

Criticism in the media only matters if it leads leadership to bend to popular opinion or if it creates a groundswell of opposition. Trump has shown that he will only listen to media that sings his praises and assholes like you won't lift a finger to stop anything short of the end of the world.

I'd prefer to do that where people matter, not abstractions that I personally cannot influence because I'm just a single cog in the machine. I also do NOT defend history's greatest monsters, the likes of Hitler, Stalin, Attila the Hun, Mussolini, Genghis Khan, and others you could name past them. For however awful he is, Mr. 45 has nowhere near the body count those tyrants had. If you want to claim that's only because he is not able to do so, then that's a diversionary tactic, because the system puts limits on all leaders we have had, even the most highly regarded of the modern era with the benefit of hindsight.

You fundamentally are defending histories monsters because none of them ended the world either and that's the standard you have set for action to be worth taking. Additional Trump has spent his first term actively undermining the checks and balances of the system, filling the justice department with cronies, and every time he's been given any slack he proceeds to push the boundaries even further.

The system is only self correcting on a geological time scale. The changes we've made in 2 centuries will linger for millions of years. The major negative effects are already being felt, climate change is responsible for the drought that was a major sparking point for the Syrian civil war.

Disasters like Chernobyl, yes, on that, I agree. But I also take severe umbrage by attempting to rally votes with terror tactics fundamentally no different than the GOP. Earth is such a complex system of counterbalanced forces, it would still take centuries to pull off irreparable damage, and by that time I feel as if all the social issues of today could possibly be worked out, with changing technology and a time to grow accustomed to them. Yeah, it's a bit of a Roddenberryist view of the future, but there it is.

I'm starting to feel at this point as if further conversation is pointless, as it was with SSJGodGoku.

You have it backwards, disasters like Chernobyl are quick for nature to counterbalance and fix. The Chernobyl exclusion zone is largely safe to enter right now. Climate change on the other hand is a constant stress that creates positive feed back loops, for instance as sea ice melts the earth absorbs more heat, which causes more sea ice to melt. We've actually hit a point where if all man made emmisions stopped tomorrow the Temperature would keep rising.

[Madner Kami]

You can, but it's like renovating a home without fixing the cracked foundation first. You might make something's better, but you're work will be for naught because you are letting the problem get worse and worse.

Sorry, but this is a stupid analogy. Within the metaphor your only option is to tear down the house, rebuild the foundations and then rebuild the house. I doubt you truely want to completely dismantle your entire governmental structure in order fix the flaws, because this means total revolution and that is the last thing that any sane member of an overall functioning society should want.

In reality, you fix the foundations of the metaphorical political house by renovating the house first and the renovated house fixes the foundations on it's own. This is called reform.

[Draco Dracul]

You can, but it's like renovating a home without fixing the cracked foundation first. You might make something's better, but you're work will be for naught because you are letting the problem get worse and worse.

Sorry, but this is a stupid analogy. Within the metaphor your only option is to tear down the house, rebuild the foundations and then rebuild the house. I doubt you truely want to completely dismantle your entire governmental structure in order fix the flaws, because this means total revolution and that is the last thing that any sane member of an overall functioning society should want.

In reality, you fix the foundations of the metaphorical political house by renovating the house first and the renovated house fixes the foundations on it's own. This is called reform.

I admit it clearly was a bad analogy as it I have not made my position clear. I am advocating for political reform, this is contrasted with Crimson's view that palliative action after the fact are just as good as meaningful political change.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

To Draco's credit, I will say that I don't see much in the way of "Democratic" or necessarily even government reform on Biden's end. Bernie stood for government reform in spite of Democrats. Warren stood for adequate attention with feasible adjustments. It's safe to say that winter is coming for the progressive agenda as per what it means for media speculation and social media digest. Then again, Trump is probably going to win so it is not going to be inconsistently bittersweet.

Overall though I think there's a great deal of sensationalism over social media or regular media and I'm more of a cold water animal, so I wonder how it's gonna turn out either way.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Interesting enough regarding Biden's allegations, I haven't really seen much of media feminists calling for his resignation. Feels kind of like the streams are trying to not be crossed.

[Captain Crimson]

To Draco's credit, I will say that I don't see much in the way of "Democratic" or necessarily even government reform on Biden's end. Bernie stood for government reform in spite of Democrats. Warren stood for adequate attention with feasible adjustments. It's safe to say that winter is coming for the progressive agenda as per what it means for media speculation and social media digest. Then again, Trump is probably going to win so it is not going to be inconsistently bittersweet.

Overall though I think there's a great deal of sensationalism over social media or regular media and I'm more of a cold water animal, so I wonder how it's gonna turn out either way.

I think Mr. Sanders possibly had good intentions as much as any narcissistic politician ever does in our modern civilization, but he was hamstrung by offering promises that were too big. I mean, true, that's the bread and butter in electoral campaigning like Mr. Obama did back in 2008, but it looks more and more like that tried-and-true method is breaking down with so many pendulum shifts back to the left and right in the past 40 years. Voters are tired of feeling lied to. We had a sweeping red wave in 2010 because lots of leftists felt disappointed by Mr. Obama and thought he wasn't living up to his promise.

Mr. Sanders is one in the same. With a historical refusal to be a team player, and the time deadlines imposed by term limits, there was no way he could have accomplished half of what he was saying. No politician can. Mr. Obama couldn't. I mean, we're still in the Middle East. Plus the baggage he had was perfect fodder for a GOP salivating at the idea of taking him on, given his own double standards. This country is just not ready for a socialist, because that is too closely associated with communist, and to the lizard brains of the average layperson, that means Russia, our old enemies. That said, his greatest asset was just that, pie-in-the-sky promises, which tend to resonate more than pragmatic solutions. So could he have won? I have no idea. Probably not, but you never know.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

To Draco's credit, I will say that I don't see much in the way of "Democratic" or necessarily even government reform on Biden's end. Bernie stood for government reform in spite of Democrats. Warren stood for adequate attention with feasible adjustments. It's safe to say that winter is coming for the progressive agenda as per what it means for media speculation and social media digest. Then again, Trump is probably going to win so it is not going to be inconsistently bittersweet.

Overall though I think there's a great deal of sensationalism over social media or regular media and I'm more of a cold water animal, so I wonder how it's gonna turn out either way.

I think Mr. Sanders possibly had good intentions as much as any narcissistic politician ever does in our modern civilization, but he was hamstrung by offering promises that were too big. I mean, true, that's the bread and butter in electoral campaigning like Mr. Obama did back in 2008, but it looks more and more like that tried-and-true method is breaking down with so many pendulum shifts back to the left and right in the past 40 years. Voters are tired of feeling lied to. We had a sweeping red wave in 2010 because lots of leftists felt disappointed by Mr. Obama and thought he wasn't living up to his promise.

Mr. Sanders is one in the same. With a historical refusal to be a team player, and the time deadlines imposed by term limits, there was no way he could have accomplished half of what he was saying. No politician can. Mr. Obama couldn't. I mean, we're still in the Middle East. Plus the baggage he had was perfect fodder for a GOP salivating at the idea of taking him on, given his own double standards. This country is just not ready for a socialist, because that is too closely associated with communist, and to the lizard brains of the average layperson, that means Russia, our old enemies. That said, his greatest asset was just that, pie-in-the-sky promises, which tend to resonate more than pragmatic solutions. So could he have won? I have no idea. Probably not, but you never know.

I'm not sure where you come off making these claims about the integrity of his campaign. He lost to Hillary with 46% of the delegates.

Speculating how good he would do in the general is very lofty when trying to factor how well he does in the primaries especially considering both this election and last.

[Draco Dracul]

To Draco's credit, I will say that I don't see much in the way of "Democratic" or necessarily even government reform on Biden's end. Bernie stood for government reform in spite of Democrats. Warren stood for adequate attention with feasible adjustments. It's safe to say that winter is coming for the progressive agenda as per what it means for media speculation and social media digest. Then again, Trump is probably going to win so it is not going to be inconsistently bittersweet.

Overall though I think there's a great deal of sensationalism over social media or regular media and I'm more of a cold water animal, so I wonder how it's gonna turn out either way.

I actually think the strongest reformer in the race was Warren who had ending the filibuster as an explicit part of her position as opposed to Sanders that wanted to keep the filibuster and try primarying Republican senators that wouldn't cooperate. I also don't think it's fair to write off Boden as lacking in reform. He's no radical, but he's built his career on finding the center of the Democratic party and planting his flag there, which is why many planks of his platform are planks of Sanders 2016 platform.

[Captain Crimson]

To Draco's credit, I will say that I don't see much in the way of "Democratic" or necessarily even government reform on Biden's end. Bernie stood for government reform in spite of Democrats. Warren stood for adequate attention with feasible adjustments. It's safe to say that winter is coming for the progressive agenda as per what it means for media speculation and social media digest. Then again, Trump is probably going to win so it is not going to be inconsistently bittersweet.

Overall though I think there's a great deal of sensationalism over social media or regular media and I'm more of a cold water animal, so I wonder how it's gonna turn out either way.

I think Mr. Sanders possibly had good intentions as much as any narcissistic politician ever does in our modern civilization, but he was hamstrung by offering promises that were too big. I mean, true, that's the bread and butter in electoral campaigning like Mr. Obama did back in 2008, but it looks more and more like that tried-and-true method is breaking down with so many pendulum shifts back to the left and right in the past 40 years. Voters are tired of feeling lied to. We had a sweeping red wave in 2010 because lots of leftists felt disappointed by Mr. Obama and thought he wasn't living up to his promise.

Mr. Sanders is one in the same. With a historical refusal to be a team player, and the time deadlines imposed by term limits, there was no way he could have accomplished half of what he was saying. No politician can. Mr. Obama couldn't. I mean, we're still in the Middle East. Plus the baggage he had was perfect fodder for a GOP salivating at the idea of taking him on, given his own double standards. This country is just not ready for a socialist, because that is too closely associated with communist, and to the lizard brains of the average layperson, that means Russia, our old enemies. That said, his greatest asset was just that, pie-in-the-sky promises, which tend to resonate more than pragmatic solutions. So could he have won? I have no idea. Probably not, but you never know.

I'm not sure where you come off making these claims about the integrity of his campaign. He lost to Hillary with 46% of the delegates.

Speculating how good he would do in the general is very lofty when trying to factor how well he does in the primaries especially considering both this election and last.

My assertion is that Mr. Sanders is his own worst enemy, those with a dogmatic worldview often are, in trying to get his agenda pushed through. Does he mean well? Sure. But purity politics are a double-edged sword in trying to get realistic change made. For example, I feel that Mr. Sanders as president would have refused to compromise on healthcare. That was where progressives felt Mr. Obama was the weakest in 2010. But he was likely to compromise on other core ideological principles that would be offensive to long-time party loyalists. It's not hard to comprehend since because he caucuses with them, he is not a democrat and he would be the first to tell you.

Then it seems I have a penchant for going off-topic, don't I? I'm in good company.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

To Draco's credit, I will say that I don't see much in the way of "Democratic" or necessarily even government reform on Biden's end. Bernie stood for government reform in spite of Democrats. Warren stood for adequate attention with feasible adjustments. It's safe to say that winter is coming for the progressive agenda as per what it means for media speculation and social media digest. Then again, Trump is probably going to win so it is not going to be inconsistently bittersweet.

Overall though I think there's a great deal of sensationalism over social media or regular media and I'm more of a cold water animal, so I wonder how it's gonna turn out either way.

I actually think the strongest reformer in the race was Warren who had ending the filibuster as an explicit part of her position as opposed to Sanders that wanted to keep the filibuster and try primarying Republican senators that wouldn't cooperate. I also don't think it's fair to write off Boden as lacking in reform. He's no radical, but he's built his career on finding the center of the Democratic party and planting his flag there, which is why many planks of his platform are planks of Sanders 2016 platform.

I agree about Biden, it's just what I was saying about the end about sensationalism. He doesn't have that much going for him (which is something I personally don't mind).