Defiant wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2020 1:22 pm
I don't find someone in their 80s running for president, but then, I had trouble seeing late-70 year olds running, and I had trouble thinking of Trump as a credible candidate, so what do I know?
I also don't find AOC credible at all as a candidate. Maybe in a decade (especially if she's grown and has a record of accomplishments)
The advantages of incumbency (and avoiding a messy primary) are significant enough that I would expect Biden to run for a second term if he's at all capable of doing so.
I also fully expect AOC to run for president some day, but it's very unlikely for 2024. I can't rule it out entirely after Buttigieg's decent run, but unlikely. She has to be contemplating eventual runs for either governor or Senate in the coming years, I expect. And a primary challenge by her against Schumer would be something.
She has less than zero chance of winning the presidency in 2024. She makes Hillary Clinton look like everyone's favorite, most beloved aunt. She needs a while to build a more expansive image (and for a bunch of olds to die off) before she should even consider running.
ImLawBoy wrote:She has less than zero chance of winning the presidency in 2024. She makes Hillary Clinton look like everyone's favorite, most beloved aunt. She needs a while to build a more expansive image (and for a bunch of olds to die off) before she should even consider running.
If the country reopens on 5/1/20, a lot of olds will be dying off well before 11/24.
But I agree that she has essentially no shot in 2024 sans a major upheaval.
ImLawBoy wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2020 2:35 pm
She has less than zero chance of winning the presidency in 2024. She makes Hillary Clinton look like everyone's favorite, most beloved aunt. She needs a while to build a more expansive image (and for a bunch of olds to die off) before she should even consider running.
When you consider that Donald Trump is the currently President...well anything is possible now. All standard calculations have gone out the window.
This attempt to intimidate and retaliate against officials who tried to uphold the rule of law against a corrupt president will continue, undoubtedly with dramatically spun findings released shortly before the election for maximum partisan effect by Trump's chief propagandist.
They now have the audio as well, so the call in question exists. Is there any confirmation outside of the Intercept that she told anyone about her mother calling in before this year? Not sure how we even know if it's her mom yet and ironically besides Reade's gushing of praise for Putin we all know that Larry King works for RT. The timing if nothing else seems to support that it's her mother right before she left her job with Biden. Regardless, Joe is believably creepy, dunno what to think.
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream
“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
I've been back and forth on it but there are a lot of issues to work through here. We don't know that is her mother calling in. If it is then the description of the abuse as a "problem" is milder than expected. There are other oddities such as the ones documented here where she was retweeting and liking Biden posts in 2017 including outright support for him. The authors of that blog claim to have an anonymous source who says she is an attention seeker but I discount that heavily. They also found a claim of potential criminal behavior. Again I'd discount that heavily considering the timing. It is at best a mess. I'll say it again though. This is expected. Expect every dirty trick in the book to be rolled out over the next several months.
A declassified report revealed that Osama bin Laden wanted to kill former President Barack H. Obama, so that a “totally unprepared” then-Vice President Joe Biden would take over- and send the nation into a crisis.
The information had been obtained during the 2011 raid that cost the terror kingpin his life, and was first reported in 2012 by The Washington Post.
...
According to Fox News, Biden revealed in 2012 that he was against the bin Laden raid, and stated that “every single person in that room hedged their bet” except for CIA Director Leon Panetta.
malchior wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2020 1:15 pm
I've been back and forth on it but there are a lot of issues to work through here. We don't know that is her mother calling in. If it is then the description of the abuse as a "problem" is milder than expected. There are other oddities such as the ones documented here where she was retweeting and liking Biden posts in 2017 including outright support for him. The authors of that blog claim to have an anonymous source who says she is an attention seeker but I discount that heavily. They also found a claim of potential criminal behavior. Again I'd discount that heavily considering the timing. It is at best a mess. I'll say it again though. This is expected. Expect every dirty trick in the book to be rolled out over the next several months.
What sucks is Democrats don't get to play by the same rules. Biden will be drug through the mud over this, while two Supreme Court justices and a President get a free pass.
It's a problem, but I don't think this is going to be fatal for Biden. the problems with Reade's story are still real, most notably that she changed her story several times (including recently). The other thing (which is important to me) is that there aren't any other accusers. Short of that, this is going to be a lingering accusation, and he may have to more directly / publicly respond to it, but with coronavirus sucking up all the media airspace, I doubt much will come of it in the end.
That's with the big caveat that other accusers don't come forward. If they do, *then* he may have a major major problem.
While not an excuse, Biden is still up against "grab them by the pussy" then "bribe the porn star to shut up about it" Trump.
"A lie can run round the world before the truth has got its boots on." -Terry Pratchett, The Truth "The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to those who think they've found it." -Terry Pratchett, Monstrous Regiment
If ya dont vote anti Trump you're also letting them take over the Supreme Court among other things. I dont think Ginsburg can hold out 4 more years.
--------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake. http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk
"Has high IQ. Refuses to apply it"
When in doubt, skewer it out...I don't know.
Zarathud wrote: Mon Apr 27, 2020 7:39 pm
While not an excuse, Biden is still up against "grab them by the pussy" then "bribe the porn star to shut up about it" Trump.
Honestly, I'm at the point where I just don't care. In the race to who is the worst human being, Trump has such a lead that I don't think there is anything Joe could do to catch up. As I mentioned, he's not my favored candidate, but I'll vote for a flaming bag of shit over Trump.
“It is completely wrong for the B.O.E. to cancel New York’s presidential primary,” Ms. Ocasio-Cortez wrote on Twitter. She added: “If N.Y. doesn’t want to risk possibly millions of people voting in-person, we need to mail everyone a ballot. Not an application for one.”
Mr. Kellner said their decision was in keeping with a New York law adopted on April 3 providing that candidates should be removed from ballots if they suspend or terminate their campaigns.
If the issue of names of withdrawn candidates on ballots in relation to AOC sounds familiar, there's a reason for that.
Joe Crowley is still on the ballot in New York’s 14th Congressional District. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wants him off.
“I’ve made my support for you clear and the fact I’m not running,” Crowley said. “I’d like to connect but I’m not willing to air grievances over Twitter.”
[...]'
Still, it’s true that Crowley’s name is remaining on the ballot, much to the chagrin of Ocasio-Cortez and the Working Families Party. He says that’s because of the legal hoops he’d have to jump through to remove his name, and one elections law expert Vox talked to agreed there would be obstacles.
Zarathud wrote: Mon Apr 27, 2020 7:39 pm
While not an excuse, Biden is still up against "grab them by the pussy" then "bribe the porn star to shut up about it" Trump.
Honestly, I'm at the point where I just don't care. In the race to who is the worst human being, Trump has such a lead that I don't think there is anything Joe could do to catch up. As I mentioned, he's not my favored candidate, but I'll vote for a flaming bag of shit over Trump.
I'm kind of on the same page. It's also part of why I don't think that the Reade accusations will be much more a periodic irritant for Biden, unless and until additional accusers come forward.
El Guapo wrote: Mon Apr 27, 2020 7:31 pm
It's a problem, but I don't think this is going to be fatal for Biden. the problems with Reade's story are still real, most notably that she changed her story several times (including recently). The other thing (which is important to me) is that there aren't any other accusers. Short of that, this is going to be a lingering accusation, and he may have to more directly / publicly respond to it, but with coronavirus sucking up all the media airspace, I doubt much will come of it in the end.
That's with the big caveat that other accusers don't come forward. If they do, *then* he may have a major major problem.
Here's a 2019 story on Reade's allegations where Reade says: “He used to put his hand on my shoulder and run his finger up my neck,” Reade said. “I would just kind of freeze and wait for him to stop doing that.” That's a very, very different story than what's in the Business Insider story malchior linked to.
pr0ner wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:48 amHere's a 2019 story on Reade's allegations where Reade says: “He used to put his hand on my shoulder and run his finger up my neck,” Reade said. “I would just kind of freeze and wait for him to stop doing that.” That's a very, very different story than what's in the Business Insider story malchior linked to.
That's the rub with these old accusations. The stuff in-between often turns into doubt. Maybe they didn't feel comfortable telling the whole story. Maybe it is made up. In any case, they'll be scrutinized on every detail and they know that so to an extent it's fair game. On the other hand we have to be a bit respectful since she now fits into a potential pattern. Still, In my opinion, what changes the game for me is the neighbor. Some neighbor saying that she remembers that story is a big difference. Could there be a conspiracy? Maybe. There is a fringe connecting Reade to Putin and trying to make this a russia, russia, russia story. Put that crazy aside, like El Guapo said if another comes out Joe has a major, major problem.
Still like others said Trump is an existential threat. His malignant narcissism has killed Americans now. He needs to go. I don't care how. I don't believe that even if the allegation is true that he is somehow going to approach the evil and rot that Trump represents.
And that comes from someone who has many reservations with Joe. His candidacy worries me. I don't think he is up to this fight but he is what we have. So be it. The die is cast. We have little choice but to support him.
These are pretty serious allegations. I wonder what would have happened if he ever ran for VP in some alternative time line? Like, I wonder if all the vetting and investigations that might have happened when he was going to be elected then would have turned up anything. I'm not saying there isn't something to look at here, but it's amazing to me how magically he's the nominee and this bubbles to the surface.
Smoove_B wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:00 pm
These are pretty serious allegations. I wonder what would have happened if he ever ran for VP in some alternative time line? Like, I wonder if all the vetting and investigations that might have happened when he was going to be elected then would have turned up anything. I'm not saying there isn't something to look at here, but it's amazing to me how magically he's the nominee and this bubbles to the surface.
I also find it interesting how Trumps 'team' was going after Hunter Biden, and not going after this at all.
Smoove_B wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:00 pm
These are pretty serious allegations. I wonder what would have happened if he ever ran for VP in some alternative time line? Like, I wonder if all the vetting and investigations that might have happened when he was going to be elected then would have turned up anything. I'm not saying there isn't something to look at here, but it's amazing to me how magically he's the nominee and this bubbles to the surface.
The opposite is true though. We saw it with Kavanaugh as well. Sometimes when it becomes apparent how much power the person is about to wield accusers feel compelled to tell their story.
Unagi wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:39 pm
I also find it interesting how Trumps 'team' was going after Hunter Biden, and not going after this at all.
Yet
Or this could be through them. I'm not saying it's likely but *every dirty trick* is going to be rolled out. These are not people bound by morals or ethics.
Smoove_B wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:00 pm
These are pretty serious allegations. I wonder what would have happened if he ever ran for VP in some alternative time line? Like, I wonder if all the vetting and investigations that might have happened when he was going to be elected then would have turned up anything. I'm not saying there isn't something to look at here, but it's amazing to me how magically he's the nominee and this bubbles to the surface.
The opposite is true though. We saw it with Kavanaugh as well. Sometimes when it becomes apparent how much power the person is about to wield accusers feel compelled to tell their story.
Unagi wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:39 pm
I also find it interesting how Trumps 'team' was going after Hunter Biden, and not going after this at all.
Yet
Or this could be through them. I'm not saying it's likely but *every dirty trick* is going to be rolled out. These are not people bound by morals or ethics.
Not at any point when he was Vice President and not when he was the immediate frontrunner for the 2020 democratic nomination (during the months before he clinched)? Not after Biden became a prohibitive favorite (but before the race ended)? And coming forward to back up the "back rub" accusers but stopping short of mentioning sexual assault is at least strange as well. Also, with Kavanaugh at least there's a massive difference in public perception / prominence between being on the D.C. Circuit and being a Supreme Court justice. For VP, and when being a presidential frontrunner, there's a much bigger amount of public scrutiny.
Also, the Russia angle isn't crazy either, given that Reade wrote a crazy pro-Putin screed on Medium that she has since taken down (and wrote a post about how she left the Senate because of it's anti-Russian imperialism).
malchior wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:02 pmThe opposite is true though. We saw it with Kavanaugh as well. Sometimes when it becomes apparent how much power the person is about to wield accusers feel compelled to tell their story.
I think that would mean more to me if he wasn't already the VP. Again, I'm not saying it isn't credible, its just the timing is really interesting. Add in the fact that accusations like this will absolutely peel (D) voters away but the same situation causes (R) voters to double down. It's amazing.
El Guapo wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:11 pmAlso, the Russia angle isn't crazy either, given that Reade wrote a crazy pro-Putin screed on Medium that she has since taken down (and wrote a post about how she left the Senate because of it's anti-Russian imperialism).
I more meant the people digging in to see if the neighbor, brother, etc. has ties to Russia. Her it is another piece of the puzzle.
malchior wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:02 pmThe opposite is true though. We saw it with Kavanaugh as well. Sometimes when it becomes apparent how much power the person is about to wield accusers feel compelled to tell their story.
I think that would mean more to me if he wasn't already the VP. Again, I'm not saying it isn't credible, its just the timing is really interesting. Add in the fact that accusations like this will absolutely peel (D) voters away but the same situation causes (R) voters to double down. It's amazing.
Definitely which is why we have to slot it into a framework where there is an actual conspiracy. It is the insane disinformation reality we live in. We are living in the cyberpunk world I read as a kid. It never ceases to amaze me how close they got except for the fully articulating elective prosthetics. And we are getting close on those.
El Guapo wrote: Mon Apr 27, 2020 7:31 pm
Short of that, this is going to be a lingering accusation, and he may have to more directly / publicly respond to it, but with coronavirus sucking up all the media airspace, I doubt much will come of it in the end.
Claiming she's not his type should suffice, right?
El Guapo wrote: Mon Apr 27, 2020 7:31 pm
Short of that, this is going to be a lingering accusation, and he may have to more directly / publicly respond to it, but with coronavirus sucking up all the media airspace, I doubt much will come of it in the end.
Claiming she's not his type should suffice, right?
Heh. I mean, just a few years ago I would have thought not, but...
I dunno. A libertarian candidate can pull support from the left and right, and could pull support from Never Trumper Republicans who might otherwise hold their noses and pull the lever for the Democratic candidate. Or it could be that he'll pull support from Never Trumpers who would otherwise not bother voting, or maybe even convince some Republicans who support Trump but have their doubts that he's a better choice.
But honestly, I don't think a third party candidate will get much traction, given the polarized views on this administration, plus the current environment where even the Democratic candidate doesn't get all that much coverage.
