I'm 72 and I don't want him to run again! I want younger people in government! We have a lower age limit for the presidency; it's time to put an upper age limit on it. And Feinstein and Pelosi need to step down too.
I agree, but they have not been mentoring others to take their place. That is the sad part. Elizabeth Warren could replace Nancy Pelosi in a heartbeat, but would she? As for DiFi, there are some great Black women who would be great to represent California and hold their ground on principles.
I also agree. I love President Biden and applaud all he has done and all he tried to do but we need younger leaders. And, perhaps, tougher leaders. Elizabeth Warren would have made a great president and I love the idea of her as speaker.
Elizabeth Warren would make a more powerful Majority Leader than Schumer has been! The Dems just need to lose their nice guy image for Awhile & act tougher & be stronger with their words!
Now that you mention it, I guess you're right. Republicans were talking about making Trump speaker.
Just think of it, Warren Speaker of the House while simultaneously a leading senator! She'd be awfully busy, but I think she could handle it, & in those positions steer Congress & our government overall back in the right direction.
Does this Article say the Speaker MUST be a Member of the House? I don’t see that in your quote, only that House Representatives shall chose … look deeper, maybe.
Inflation was just as bad in the 70s & especially the 80s when Reagan spewed his trickle down economics plans that never trickled anywhere but up & began the Oligarchy we live with now! Biden didn’t wish inflation on the Nation & has done what he could to counteract it with only moderate success. Keep thinking how much worse our lives would be if the big orange idiot was in charge!!! These same Oligarchs are showing their displeasure with Dems in charge by raising their prices on gas & food just bec they can without losing a single customer! If only we could boycott those companies, the power would go back to the customer where it belongs!! Don’t blame Biden. Passing a wealth tax might help but it could also backfire on the populace! There’s no easy answer.
Your comments deserve a reply, and I hope someone with better knowledge than mine will respond.
For starters, though, President Joe Biden is NOT an inept, feeble old man. He won the election by more than 7 million votes, so he was definitely chosen by the majority of Americans who voted. I believe he is doing a good job, but he is limited by a Congress with a slim majority, and one in which the republican minority cares nothing about our country and makes progress doubtful due to their lack of participation in moving our country forward. President Biden has been faced with handling a multitude of serious problems, and unless the republicans in Congress decide to become loyal to the oath to our Constitution, little will be accomplished.
I don't believe for a second your explanation of President Biden's association with the World Health Organization in that he would give away our birthright! You need to add your sources for this to inform people how they can check on your statements which I consider to be untrue.
Where is your proof of that? Because you sound like either QAnon's foolishness or a FOX Entertainment channel's follower. I hope I am as "Inept" at his age but then the way the American people behaved when we needed just a few weeks of everyone pulling together to slow the pandemic and large numbers were whining "what about MEEEEEEEEE, I don't like a mask" instead of "what about US" I'm not so sure about their intelligence anyway. Considering what he was left with I think we could do much worse...and I don't agree with every individual decision he makes but as a "whole performance, we could do worse, Particularly with Mansion and Sinema hanging around his neck like 2 albatross'.
Runaway inflation is impacting the entire world not just the USA. Should we blame Biden for the inflation in Canada, England, Germany, etc. etc. on and on? Were your statement concerning the World Health Organization correct, I do not believe that any future President would honor that agreement if it were detrimental to our country. What is your point?
Warren couldn't replace Pelosi as House Speaker, but could & should replace Schumer as Senate Majority Leader if she can't win the presidency, which is where I think she should be for the salvation of our nation.
Elizabeth Warren is a Senator, Nancy is a Congresswoman - oranges and apples. For a replacement we need someone who is currently in Congress, has a following, is both well liked and forceful. I can't think of any women right now, but Adam Schiff would fit the bill. I admire AOC but she is too outspoken, you need a person who stands up for what they perceive as right. but willing to compromise, and that certainly isn't Kevin McCarthy. I'd like to see Elizabeth Warren as Senator pro tem, I think she'd be better than Chuck Schumer and way, way, better than stick it in a drawer McConnell.
Katie Porter, definitely yes, Pramila Jayapal maybe, Rashida Tlaib definitely not. The House Speaker must be a leader that others will willingly follow. Katie is such a person and she has the courage of her convictions, Rashida, while I personally admire her, is too foul mouthed (again like me) to be a leader. Leadership demands respect, if you don't have that respect you can't lead. Unfortunately, this is an error too many women (and an equal number of men) make. Joe Biden is an excellent leader because he never publicly demeans himself.
Fay Reid; Adam Schiff would be a good choice, but I will say, Katie Porter is kind of the Elizabeth Warren of the House, and former student of Warren, Both Schiff and Porter are pretty sharp, IMO.
<off topic> - Congrats, on the Sunday Caption for 9/3/22
I agree that Katie Porter would be an excellent choice also, she's highly intelligent, young, and very pro-active, She is the kind of Leader we Democrats need.
Even if Warren was willing to step down from the Senate and run for Congress- and she won- she would enter the House as a Freshman Congressman. If she made a play for Pelosi's seat- which she wouldn't and for good reason- she would have to depend on the entire 435 members of Congress electing her Speaker. It would never happen. Liz would never leave the Senate for anything short of the White House or SCOTUS anyway.
His name has slipped my mind, but I heard that Pelosi prefers a relatively young, good-looking charismatic black man, who was a member of the Trump impeachment committee, & more recently gave a powerful, morally based rebuke to Clarence Thomas. He is apparently rather centrist & corporatist, so there would hardly be any change ideologically.
...which is why I said, "Even if Warren was willing to step down from the Senate and run for Congress". Someone above is trying to spin a strategy that somehow Warren becomes Speaker of the House while still a Senator, and I"ve not been very successful in explaining why this is loony tunes.
I agree. While the Condtitution does NOT expressly state that the leader needs to be a member, it's never happened. Most likely would entail judicial opinion on precident and end up in the SC. (Talk about "Looney Tunes"!)
The Constitution expressly states that the election of Congressional officers will be executed by Congress. That means the Speaker is in control. Full stop.
You have to be a resident of NY to be an elected official. Warren is a Constitutional Law Professor at Harvard who has been living in Boston for years while teaching. This is why she's Massachusetts' Senator and not New York's.
Why would Warren want to give up her Senate seat in Mass for one in NY? Schumer isn't going anywhere soon. He worked his entire life to be nominated Majority Leader and he's not going to give it to Warren- and Pelosi isn't going to abandon him, either.
I don't like any set, hard & fast limits like that. People age differently. Age has apparently slowed & hampered Biden. He's not as sharp as he used to be. It has obviously affected Feinstein adversely. Trump never was all there, but he certainly hasn't gotten any better with age.
On the other hand, Bernie is still sharp, but he does seem as old as he is, which is quite old, & he had a heart attack in 2020. Now look at Robert Reich. I think he is well into his 70s, and he is still as sharp as ever, and appears pretty vigorous. And Elizabeth Warren, who is also in her 70s by now although she doesn't look it, is as sharp as a tack, one of the best minds in politics, with seemingly endless energy, always, like Reich, coming up with great solutions to our problems, with a plan for everything. We missed a great opportunity by not electing her last time. I hope we don't make that same mistake next time, but I'm sure we will, as neither the electorate nor the PTB that influence elections are smart enough to realize that someone like her is just what we need during these critical times.
Eileen Lion, I may have been mistaken that you were liking what I wrote. But on second glance you may have been responding to Jaime Ramirez, who I don't completely concur with. I may just be wanting to have found someone who agrees with me to that degree (on all counts) but may not have found that here. I am going to learn more on how to use my "collapse" button.
No I don't agree. Age is not the problem. People talking about age at all are missing the point. We can only elect the right leaders when we know the qualities we need and value them in ourselves first. Wise people choose wise leaders, and wise leaders get better with age and recuse themselves when they know it's best for the office they inhabit.
I agree 100%. Warren was my top pick for Pres in 2020 & Kamala was 2nd! The electorate has to be educated to put trust in electing a woman for President before it will happen, I’m sure of this!
I would add Schumer to the list as he's proven that he's not a leader, not charismatic, not in touch and not a fighter. And this is the time for fighters.
Let's jut throw everybody out. Let's just throw all leadership out and stand in a state of real confusion and let the void be filled by Trumpets who TELL US what to think. I don't agree. Unless you can do it better and are running against him, I don't like to be about getting rid of the only ones who are for us. Schumer stands for the people like you and me. When YOU stand for something different then you will be able to see who is even more what we need to represent us. I only like to see criticism from those who can put their money where their mouth is. You are entitled to better leadership but only when you can pick it. No throwing of our GEMS out!
I used to be prickly about any negative comments about Joe because I really like the guy, but it's apparent to me now that the loud, persistent voices that half the potential voters listen to tend to come from the right. Virtually none, with the exception of AOC, Katy Porter and a few others, come from the left, and the strongest among them, the most forthright among them, are derided not only by the right but by the establishment DNC and DSCC as well.
If Joe can change his approach, which would require his getting smarter, more savvy advisors, not unusual for a President halfway through his term, then perhaps he can pull a rabbit out of a hat. I'd be delighted if he can do that, but at this point I'm doubtful that can and will occur.
We need Democratic leaders who can make Democrats and the 'undecided' stand up and cheer. FDR did that, as did JFK, Obama and unfortunately Reagan on the other side. Perhaps one will emerge but if we don't keep both houses we'd best have a primary for the 2024 election, find a dynamic leader, or the nation will continue to sink.
Agree. The oy reason Biden is "too old" is because the media and our culture feed us garbage stereotypes about age, perpetuated by younger people who want seniority. There are countries where that hadn't happened -- where age and wisdom were respected -- at least until American-style media began to influence opinion. The non-discriminatory reason that, I think, Biden shouldn't run again, barring significant change, is because, as Porter writes, he's not sufficiently dynamic, etc.
People in politics should be forced to "retire" at the age that Social Security provides full benefits. There should be TERM LIMITS for ALL elected elected offices AND "supreme" Court justices. BTW - Our Constitution does NOT say that Supreme Court justices are appointed for life, but rather says that they can keep their jobs if they continue in "good standing". This is highly subjective as the current "supreme" court majority appears to be religious extremists and their recent decisions are NOT "good" in my opinion. TERM LIMITS solves that. The reality is HUGE money, dark money and "shell" companies, can easily prop up people that the elites WANT to do their bidding. If you actually want to clean up the corruption you MUST take ALL PRIVATE MONEY out of our election and judicial appointment system. It is very easy to purchase people to stop any progress. (Not saying that this is what happened to Sinema and Manchin, but it should be looked into.) One point about Biden, if he was a stronger President, he would threaten to expose those politician's dirty secrets if they did NOT vote for his progressive, for the people, policies. Why doesn't he do this?
R u saying u want another loud mouth that tries to control the narrative & doesn’t listen to anyone who’s smarter than himself! We just tried that you know!
The electorate loved Reagan because he was in the movies and television, relatively handsome,and had an excellent voice. The electorate, at large, never looked at his inability to govern. I had several arguments with my Mother and Aunt, (both of whom couldn't vote, thank goodness, because they were still Canadians,) because I wouldn't support Ronnie Baby. I knew from his bungling Governorship of California that he was all talk and no ability, but they kept saying "but Jimmy Carter wears jeans in the white house" - as though that mattered a damn. This is the sort of thinking we have to contend with. As I said, I'm glad they couldn't vote, but their are millions just like them who look only at the candidates appearance and speaking ability and not at all at his/her ability to lead,
Schumer hardly stands for anything. He's weak, corporatist & isn't that principled, easily caving in.
We are on a forum meant to analyze political questions. This forum's administrator, mentor & leader has invited us to do give our opinions, not to take over the politicians' jobs, & as citizens with lots of opinions, we are more than willing to oblige.
You can say what you want, Jamie, But you won't find agreement with me by trying to underscore points with no real backing or replacement thoughts. Waving the flag of rights does not help either or emphasizing how strongly you feel does not work with me. How you feel or any of your emotions does not matter to me. It is not my responsibility, either, to make you feel heard. I do not agree with you about Schumer. To me he is the best of what we have at this time and we need more support to get his good ideas through.
Schumer's main job was to try to broker peace between Sanders & Manchin. That proved impossible, because Bernie had to attack Manchin ad hominem for not giving Bernie a victory with his Build Back Better, without compromises. If Bernie compromised, Manchin would've gotten credit, too. Instead, we got nothing.
Sadly, I cannot fault Manchin for deciding he can trust McConnell more than he can trust the Democratic circular firing squad
There was far more compromise than there should've been. The bill started at $10 trillion over 10 years (1T/yr), & Manchin whittled it down to $1.5T, <1/6 of its original price tag, & Manchin still rejected it. The coal baron Manchin has been playing the Democratic Party on behalf of McConnell & the Republicans with his intransigence & deception to the detriment of the entire nation with BBB, voting rights & other issues, repeatedly contradicting his own assertions.
Cynthia. Completely agree….feel the same way about Biden and Schumer. People tend to put too much emphasis on charisma and age. I watch Biden on the go constantly and considering the opposition to everything from republicans he has accomplished so much.
As far as running again, I would suspect he would prefer not to; however, if he’s the best one for the job..as he was in ‘20…and is in good health and feels it is in the Country’s best interests, then maybe he would.
Oy! Age discrimination involves treating an applicant or employee less favorably because of his or her age. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) forbids age discrimination against people who are age 40 or older.
Cagey maybe; wise -- not in 'my' definition of wise. Too much to elaborate upon with respect to her various betrayals of the progressive democratic agenda but one word --Cuellar -- should give you a hint regarding my stance here. If you're making a case 'for' her and 'against' ageism, okay, I get it. But I'm never gonna go with 'wise'.
When Pelosi gave her support to Cuellar, she completely lost my respect. He is everything we’re fighting against, especially us here in Texas! His opponent could have used that boost and would’ve probably put her over the top. I was seriously livid the day I read Pelosi did this, because it felt just like what it was, a betrayal.
To all of us who donated, wrote letters, texted, knocked on doors, et al, to put Democrats back in the majority throughout our government, then she turned around and voted for a Republican masquerading as a Democrat. He’s no different than Manchin or Senema.
she and the democratic establishment are terrified of the progressives... they would do anything to stop them from getting seats, even endorsing an anti-abortion guy, like Cuellar.
How old are you, Daniel? I think you must be a young whippersnapper. I'm 81, and I don't agree that 'demenSHAH' sets in once you hit 65. I was still working at 72, and I would have continued if our school board had not cut the Adult Education Program! You can't assume all people are out of it once they're past 65! At 55, a person would have a 20 year range to become President of the U.S. Age does bring wisdom in many "old" folks, and to me, 35 seems quite young and lacking the experience age brings. I realize there are exceptions!
Aging is real, and it's silly to deny it. Reagan was entering senility in his last term. The executive demands of the presidency require too much mental agility and stamina for the elderly. I would pick 64-68 as a reasonable but soft age limit for the first term. That would mean leaving after two terms at 72 -75 or so.
We really don't have enough exposure in the primaries to adequately evaluate the candidate for mild cognitive deficits. The president's staff does everything they can to shield their candidate from situations that might lead them to ex[pose their deficiencies. Biden was always a mush mouth. Is it worse now? I don't know.
I totally agree. When I first moved to Sacramento in 1961 we had a Judge, Peter Shields, who at 90 years of age walked 7 miles to and from his home in east Sacramento to the Court House. He was sharp as a tack in his decisions too. There should be a way, however for removing a person who is obviously incapable of doing their job.
Hi Marge, Wish I could agree with you. Very impressed with your own personal mental and physical fitness, but you’re clearly exceptional (check out the folks at any senior center or Road Scholar trip.) While some elders maintain sharp minds and physical vigor, it’s normal and commonplace for seniors to lose short term memory and physical strength and endurance. That’s why most folks seek to retire in old age. Speaking from experience as a 70 year old with debilitating arthritis, and - what was I talking about?
Craig ; LOL! familiar geezer territory! But does an occasional memory hiccup make a person unable to make decisions? Remember when people were exhorted to not trust anyone over 30? If you can, you are unqualified because you are too old! Also, many people who are fit and engaged in mainstream culture do not hang out at senior centers!
I don’t mean to imply that seniors lack wisdom that many indeed gain from a lifetime of learning and deep experience. To the contrary! My concern has more to do with energy level, mental and physical acuity, and life expectancy in old age. The president has an enormously complex, challenging and exhausting job as the chief executive. Actions taken at that level of responsibility have huge consequences.
The FAA requires commercial airline pilots to retire at age 65. I doubt that the pilot of Air Force One is anywhere near the same age (79) as his no. 1 passenger. (Let’s hope not!)
Biden is a hell of a lot better than the other side of the aisle. And he is the incumbent, voted in by a clear majority in spite of all the dirty tricks from the other side, and unfortunately, installed into our very system of laws, apparently.
Craig ; It is a slippery slope to diagnose the President of the United States, just because some people do not like his style. He can still deliver complicated intelligent cogent speeches. Trump obviously has some mental issues. Were we able to get rid of him? I also point out once more that our very system has serious flaws that anyone, no matter their competence will be hamstrung by. Electoral College, an activist 'Supreme Court' dominated by incompetent judges who do not reflect the will of the people, and do not understand the Constitution and think they can thumb their noses at it, the filibuster and gerrymandering, just for starters.
No. Absolutely not. With age comes wisdom, at least if you’ve got half a brain. I was just getting started in my fifties. Don’t be ageist. It’s not helpful.
Bernie is 80. There is no one more clear and articulate than Bernie anywhere. Watch his committee hearings. Nothing Lindsay Graham or any republicans say rattles him. He stays on target. I am hoping Bernie continues to stay in the Senate until he is at least 90.
Daniel H.; No, not me. We should be the judge on that at the ballot box. In normal times Biden would not have gotten my vote, but these are not and were not normal times in 2019. The truth is after the trumpster, Biden winning was like, 'thank you Jesus, yes I will go back to church someday!'
The republicans foisted the evil dump on us and couldn't be bothered to or were to afraid to correct their mistake. I will give them a break right here, one time, I want to think the R's did not know he was that evil, after all they (R's) are not infallible humans. But we should make them pay for it, anyway. Vote, vote, vote, our lives depend on it.
The problem with your argument, DW, is the statement "I want to think the R's did not know he was that evil" is undone by the Republicans themselves. Because I am retired, I was able to watch the entire January 6th insurrection LIVE, from beginning to end. I was on the phone with my friend in DC, whom I had called to make sure he was safe. I heard about Charlie (alias Kevin) McCarthy's phone calls pleading with trump to call off his dogs. Then, when it was over, like the good little puppet he is, he rushed to Florida to kiss trump's rump and assure him he believed everything the trumpster said. All but a small handful of the Republicans bent over backwards to laud and acclaim the trumpster as their hero. Why do you think the January 6th House committee was only able to seat 2 Republicans?
Yes Fay, that is a problem. My thought is that back when the 'powers that be', not talking about the mouth pieces McConnell and McCarthy, decided to put up the highly manipulable con man for the highest office in the land they didn't realize he was such a 'loose cannon' swinging in every direction, all the time. With the "I want to think", I was giving the once viable, worthy and workable republicans, as part of the two party legislative system we have, 'the benefit of doubt'. Honestly, I don't think Trump knew the power of the presidency or what he would or could do with it. Result, Jan 6, and beyond.
Crap, Judith! We need quality in government, not ageism. I can't believe you say this on this channel. Wisdom can grow with age. Don't blame age. Our older politicians are the best thing we have going for us, as Democrats. Your desire for more rules show YOU to be rigid. Maybe your age is causing you to not be able to change. Youth is not the answer. Wisdom is. If I could put a thumbs down on your comment, I WOULD.
Feel free to give me a thumbs down. If only wisdom automatically came with age. It doesn't. I agree that we need quality in government, but I also believe we need fresh ideas from younger minds. We've already said there needs to be a minimum age; why not a maximum? That would save us from people like Feinstein who clearly needs to go but refuses to step down. I'd be fine with having people beyond the age limit in some capacity as advisors, but I'd like younger people as my elected officials.
Mitch McConnell and Lindsay Graham should step down as well. All the old people should step down and let some younger people put this country back in order.
I agree that both mcconnell and graham should step down. And for your information it's not about whether someone is old, the most successful people to effect changes are the ones who are connected to the American public and work to create better environments for all. Some younger people are just as stuck in their conservatism as the older ones can be. Witness the Supreme Court installments done by trump! They are young in age, old in thoughts.
Okay, maybe "old" isn't the issue but some of these men have outdated thought patterns and are stuck in some old fashioned ideas that the world has evolved past and they haven't. Younger people can be offered ideas that they may at least chew on but many older politicians are stuck in their thinking and won't budge from it. They are blocking progress and should be voted out,
Couldn't agree with you more!!! Your good judgement of Feinstein and Pelosi is not using age to degrade the work they have done and still do. I look up to these leaders with MY good judgement. I am 65 and they are roles models to me of good judgement, dedication, and bravery to continue to work inside of such opposition and even threat (Pelosi). I need to do more reading, in fact, to get more background on each of these wonderful individuals who have not "lost value as they age" as ageism would have it. They are big shoes to fill in the democratic party. I want to follow their example in anything I do. Let only them criticize that can do DO BETTER! Thank you for your comment.
The only reason Corps retire people @ 65 or earlier is bec they want to trade them in for younger people they can pay less money to get the same job done!
To be fair: NO ONE wanted ole Biden to run in 2020 ANYWAY! He has always been an ineffective, milquetoast candidate that everyone liked solely because he ruffled no feathers. My wish is for a TRUE PROGRESSive to run and win, dear Professor Reich. Maybe Katie Porter???
To put it quite bluntly, he was shoved down the voters throats by the democratic machine. The wheeling and dealing behind the scenes was beyond belief. He was probably a solid 3 or 4 on the list of choices and Kamala was maybe a 5. There were many better choices available but the party knew it could control both of them. A progressive terrifies them because real change might be the end of most of their sources of cash or at least they would have to tell where it comes from. Real change will never come out of that party. I was a life long dem until the last two elections. Now I want a young Bernie Sanders or even would prefer him to the other options we get forced down our throats. But I am very old and cynical.
I favor Gavin Newsom, if he can get his California healthcare system sorted out. He's the right age, charismatic, and is fairly progressive.
When he hoisted the flag of universal healthcare in California, he was vigorously opposed by the medical industry, so he backed down. I think the correct approach is not universal healthcare, but rather CalCare for all who want it. Maybe this could be translated into a federal context.
Newsom has been astonishing lately! Have you been following him? He’s taken on DeSantis and has been really assertive in a progressive way. I’m shocked because he’s always been a centrist nonentity but he finally seems to have gotten the memo. I’m very hopeful. (And he does have great hair.)
I vote in California. He is ambitious. He avoided being recalled because voters did not want a Republican replacement. He still emails for donations. I question his judgment because he was married to Kimberly Guilfoyle.
Newsom strikes me as the very kind of wealthy Democrat who infuriates the working class. Both California and New York are more forgiving of wealth, maybe because they have so much of it, but I don't think Newsom plays well in the Midwest or Mountain West.
I agree. I think there is a reservoir of resentment against “coastal elites.” Newsom gave many Covid news conferences which I thought weren’t as good as those of disgraced New York governor what’s-his-name. Schools were kept closed a long time in CA, which could be used against him in parts of the country which unlocked sooner.
I also like his joint video with the Washington (Jay Inslee) & Oregon (Kate Brown) governors saying those states will be safe havens for women needing abortion.
I’ve thought of Newsom too. The common (and often well deserved) trope about Democrats, held by those on the Right is that Dems are weak, wimpy, timid, afraid to take bold, aggressive action - especially without permission from their opponents (euphemistically called “bipartisanship”). Trump on the other hand, had no redeeming feature other than his willingness to be an a$$hole. That seemed to be enough for a surprising number of voters.
Not that it is the ONLY feature, but at this point, the Democrats really need someone who is also somewhat of a shark. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of anyone on the Left other than Newsom who might fit the bill.
right on, and it should've started in the State California, who had an 80 billion dollars surplus to the budget, but hey, our governot was "taken care of" bythe "healthcare for profit" industry lobbyists, and out the window flew our universal healthcare in the State of California.
I hear your frustration and largely agree with it. But it's difficult to go up against the entire health industry in one giant leap. I think it's second only to the financial industry with regard to lobbyists and money behind it. I'm going to take a wait-and-see approach. His insulin iniative looks pretty good.
Steve, glad the insulin initiative looks good, but this is more than that. It's about becoming a model for the whole USA...Obamacare was OK-ish, but I don't wish to you to be hospitalized, even for a night, on it :-(...Obama was opposed in implementing the single payer by that schmuck Lieberman, which would've been the 60th vote, but it's been more than 10 years since, and it's time for the new steps towards universal healthcare. We're the only civilized country in the world where the health is tied to the job. Time to move on, right Gavin Newsom? :-)
There are very few Dems on the national stage who could stand up to Ron De Santis, who - I hate to say it - is good-looking, appealing and charismatic, besides being so evil he's called De Satan in Florida. We need Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama-style charisma in our next Democratic President.
I believe Old Joe should actually relax for his remaining years & enjoy life with Jill & his grandkids! Seems like this country has taken a lot out of him already in just 2 years! He says he will run but I really wish he would ask Obama to take the reins again especially if the Dems can win a larger majority in the Senate & House. As bad as I’d love to see a woman run for President, I just don’t think this Country is ready for it even though there are very many completely qualified! I also would like to see some much younger Senators & Reps in Congress try their hands & governing! I also think Gavin Newsom, Pete Buttigieg, or even our Gov Andy Beshear of KY would make excellent Presidential material. I hope nobody ever goes looking to CEOs for Presidential material. They simply don’t understand the workings of government or Congress but how could they when they’re only experienced in cut-throat Capitalism!
he was vigorously bribed by the medical industry and, like majority of US politicians, he got the bribe...we don't need presidential prospects that a bribable:-(
I was referring strictly to the single payer in California that he campaigned on....please try to find independent sources for your information, not just what cable news feeds you on a daily basis:-)
I have witnessed what he has done through the years from when he was a mayor till now. He has always been courageous in the midst of spineless politicians. Do not accuse people who do not agree with your opinion.
You need to understand the difference between a democratic election (small d) and the Democratic Party (Big D). They are not in the business of giving money to Independent candidates.
She’s perfect, but needs a bit more time staying on the right track to win. She is PERFECT, though. Did you see her on Colbert referring to past history? Girls a super star!
She was delightful on Colbert. She has become more polished and more articulate. And her smile could melt an ice berg. I don't think she's presidential timbre, YET, however. She's shows promise.
I like her a lot and I saw her on Colbert, but that thing of staying on the right track to win is not good, how long? people are fed-up with the status-quo proposed by the Dems, and on the other side we're talking about fascism and people like that Mussolini of Florida :-(
I think it would be wonderful for her to run, but she’s a ‘she’, intelligent, hispanic, young, beautiful, and relatively new to a hostile arena - the DNC would never allow it - they’re be scared to death of her power!
When the campaign committees "primary" progressive incumbents, and they have, the leadership of the party is too out of touch with what I always thought of as the Democrat's raison d'etre since about the time of FDR. I'm almost 81 and I wouldn't try to be president, but I'd vote for "old" Bernie tomorrow over many others. Newsom has attracted my notice, as well.
I voted for Hilary and for Biden. To make that jump shows a certain level ignorance. I wanted Bernie but I got stuck with the dem choices. Both a couple of duds in my opinion.
I was probably a dem before you were even born. But the party I saw had the guts to fight for poor, the middle class and labor. Where are they now? Why sucking up to the rich and begging for money just like the Rs. Not to mention the fact they have lost what little fight they had in them. They are a long way from the Kennedys. If FDR was still alive he would be horrified at what they have become. If you can't see or understand than you are no better than the right and just a party robot.
You incorrect in this assumption. There were a lot of people who voted for either the Johnson/Weld or the Jill Stein ticket in the 2016 When Trump one - Jill Stein lead the charge for a recount in several mid-west "swing states." This was an attempt on her part to absolve herself from any culpability for Trump's win. But she will never escape the fact that she was accessory to this tragedy. Had the votes these two other contenders siphoned off gone to Hillary - the course of American history would have been very different. Most likely the reason you fail to remember this is that those who voted for these "third party candidates" keep this a DEEP secret. Yes, they are responsible for Trump. Make sure, if you them - to remind them of this FACT.
No it certainly was not but it was the fault of the Electoral College, a useless leftover from the early days of our country’s history! The National Popular Vote should be how we elect our Presidents so we don’t end up with another Bush or tRump. Those 2 have done enough damage to last more than a lifetime! We must have majority rule & a functional Congress to move us forward! There are so many problems to deal with here & around the World that we can no longer afford to be stalled by a dysfunctional Congress. Hopefully some folks have finally learned that u cannot protest the choices we are dealt in each party by not voting or throwing ur vote away with a third party candidate! That’s how we end up with jerks like tRump! So if Biden is our choice instead of a younger more dynamic person, we should support him wholeheartedly & give him the majorities in Congress so he can get something of his agenda accomplished! Do you all remember back in the dark ages after Nixon’s fiasco when Gerald Ford took over? He said that he believed a woman would be made President after the death of the elected President because the American people just don’t believe a woman could be elected on her own merits & skills! That could easily happen at any time.
Now is not the time for infighting among Democrats. Mistakes were made, hopefully we and the DNC have all learned and we go forward UNITED because right now the stakes are simply too great for to seek what we believe, in our own opinion, to be the "perfect" candidate - if that is not a candidate who gives us ALL the best chance to keep the GOP out of the Oval Office. We all need to focus on the GREATER GOOD.
She, like myself, cut our ties to the Democratic party. Doesn't mean we voted for a Republican. Never have, never will. But we're looking for a new home......
Actually, the wisest thing to do after Bernie was denied the Democratic nomination, was for Bernie to accept the Green Party's offer to lead their ticket, make a secret pact with the Democratic leadership & Clinton campaign for both Bernie & Hillary to concentrate their attacks on Trump, continuing to espouse their respective policies, & then 2 or 3 weeks before Election Day, whoever was behind between the 2 withdraw & support the other.
why didn't the dems made them that offer, or do you think that everybody's like the progressives, led by Pramila Jaypal who immmediately folds at the slightest pressure put on her?
I'm sick of ageism. If NO ONE wanted him to run, how did he get nominated and elected? What you mean by "no one" is no one you like. Tell that to the black women who put him over the top.
I like Joe Biden and I think he's doing a great job despite all opposition -- from without and within. He, Nelllie and I have an expiration date. I'm 78. Spend more time with medical providers than with my family. IMHO Biden is a miracle medical marvel.
I like Democratic senators but rather would not want to lose a senate seat.
I want a clean candidate. But I supported people like Johnboy Edwards only to find that he had a secret. Same for Clinton.
I think the DNC should administer IQ tests, MMPIs and lie detector tests to the array of candidates in the 2024 elections. Pick ones with the most gravitas and those who literally pass the test.
I fully agree! I think, if "Moscowmitch" were disposed, Biden would presently be PASSING maybe 30-60% of what Bernie Sanders had planned. He has been FORCED to the left because of all the issues facing us. If he were 20 years younger, I really wouldn't mind voting for him in 2024 honestly.
Does anyone think even a genius younger candidate would fare well with the filibuster, hostile obstructionist Republicans gerrymandering and even the Electoral College which severely limits our attempts at Democracy?
Maybe not, BUT bringing everything out in the open factually and fighting instead of hoping to reach hands across the table might at least start to turn things around.
I am good with bringing everything out in the open factually and fighting. I think that is .what is happening now with the Jan 6th committee. It would be truly great if we could bein to begin to correct these flaws in our rules.
Moscow Mitch gave us the answer to deposing him & his ultra conservative attitudes. He said he would retire if he didn’t get to be Majority Leader in ‘24 so we just have to make that happen! Working to elect 2-4 more Dem Senators would give Biden more power! We need Charles Booker here in KY, Val Demings in FL, Mandela Barnes in WI, Tim Ryan in OH, MJ Hegar in TX, Dr Agbede in CA, & every other Dem candidate who’s running must be elected in Nov! I believe if tRump is indicted before the elections, the wind would be taken out of the sails of any GOP trumpers who will be running! That Party has to be reformatted & be rid of all criminals & unethical types!
Daniel, I love the idea of IQ tests, even though they only measure the ability of how well you test. But along with knowledge of the Constitution, the three branches of Government and the responsibilities of each it would be a good idea. As for lie detectors, a psychopath like trump could pass with flying colors because they honestly believe the lies that come out of their mouths are the truth.
I'm on the fence. I agree with your stance against ageism, but there is a significant mental decline in most, if not all after 80. Joe's a great guy, but we need someone who can get out in front of- or at least abreast of- all the BS going down. The only one I see that might do it is Newsom, but our best candidates always emerge during the primaries.
Perhaps I mispoke? What I meant was that he won ONLY because _rump was so DESPISED. Kind of like: "would you prefer horrific, gut-wrenching diarrhea or getting your left arm chopped off?" Biden was the sonic diarrhea by the way, and I would take that ANY DAY over losing an arm.
Oh! And the only reason he ran at all was because the DINOs were "a-scared" of Bernie Sanders so they screwed him.
Damn. I wish Bernie supporters of your ilk, because I support Bernie too, would keep your metaphors to yourself. And when are you guys going to learn to channel your anger creatively?! I'm really frustrated and tired of your hateful rhetoric
We Bernie supporters have watched the very undemocratic DNC do everything in their power to keep progressives out, including the DNC support of anti-abortion criminal Henry Cuellar against Jessica Cisneros. The DNC went hard after Nina Turner, who is a great voice for the base. The DNC needs to keep their filthy corporate money out of primaries. Then Biden does stuff like consorting with Mitch McConnell to nominate an anti-abortion judge. I think we're allowed to be angry. Angry rhetoric vs. anti-democratic, anti-progressive DNC actions? The DNC deserves the rhetoric.
Of course you're "allowed" to be angry! You don't need permission for feeling your feelings!
I can't stay in that place. I have to MOVE! in a direction that feels like it will not only express my outrage but MOVE me toward an outcome, hopefully a resolution of some sort.
You need to understand the difference between democrat with a small "d" and a Big "D", as in the National Democratic Committee. The DNC is not in the business of supporting the candidacy of candidates who register as Independent. It might have gotten him elected in Vermont, but it won't work on a Federal level. Simple fact.
Bernie is not and has never been a Democrat. I'm not sure why you expect the DNC to support a candidate who has not supported the party and in fact has held himself separate from the party. Isn't that kind of like your neighbor coming over to ask to use your ATM card because he never thought he'd need one?
The DNC is pumping corporate PAC money into Democratic primaries where a corporate incumbent is being challenged by a progressive Democrat. This is true of Cuellar vs. Cisneros and also with Nina Turner and other progressive Democrats. The DNC is telling progressives they are separate and don't belong by DNC actions during primaries. But then the DNC expects progressives to come out in large numbers in the general election, and blames progressives when they don't. Loyalty is a one way street in the DNC.
🤣🤣🤣 this is sending me! Completely agree, most voters chose between Schrump or other and obviously other was the better option. I might’ve just said the lesser of two evils but go off 🗣
When Biden announced his candidacy, he made statements to the effect of the GOP would have an "epiphany" after Trump left and return to being a party that he, Joe Biden, could work with. To be blunt, I thought he was delusional -- out of touch with the reality of the situation.
I hoped that time would have proven me wrong. The Democrats desperately need fresh leadership.
Biden came in on the heels of the first Black President and the threat of the first White Female President. He came into office with a one vote majority in the Senate. His ability to get the Infrastructure Act- a huge piece of bipartisan legislation passed is not a sign of weakness. Washington was constipated long before Biden's election. If you want to blame someone, let's talk about Newt Gingrich and his Contract with America, the Federalist Society, and Reagan's unholy menage a trois of conservative media, politics, and televangelism.
That is NoT true. Biden was 29 when he went to Congress,/ a time when compromise between parties was possible. He felt he could restore reason to Congress after the caustic years of
McConnell swearing that Obama would achieve nothing followed by the nightmare of Donald Trump. Biden can’t do anything more than Obama who has a 50-50 Senate (actually 48-50 with Manchin and Sinema). Give Biden a break. He’s old- yes- but he’s a good man. Trump is 73 or older and he’s a horrible human being.
Just what is evil about Joe Biden?? U r maybe jealous of his age & ability to still get important things done. The only evil Party was tRump & his Rethugs who are still causing a surprising amount of trouble! I wouldn’t bad mouth Biden because he’s done a marvelous job getting Covid under somewhat control if only he could mandate vaccinations for everyone, we would be in a much better state of control. CDC just released new stats about Omicron sub variants that are causing 80% of the 100,000 new infections that have been occurring across the country the past 2 weeks!! Just imagine for a minute the shape we would be in if the Orange Guy was still in charge!! Then there’s the fine line he’s been walking trying to help Ukraine beat off the Russians without starting a nuclear war with Russia. I believe his sanctions have had a terrible effect on their economy Plus angered the Oligarchs by seizing their toys. He’s not behaving like a pushover but is also not a rabble rouser like TFG was. Everybody was sick of his loud mouth of empty words don’t U think?
In 2016, I liked Biden & was hoping he would run, mostly to dilute Hillary's support so that Bernie had a better chance, but also because I thought he would make a better president. By 2020, he was only around 10th on my list (about the same as Kamala). By now, I would vote for Clinton over Joe ( or Harris) because I think she better understands the danger the republofascists pose to our democracy, nation & future.
So you're going to run for office? I'm continually amazed by people who feel that voting is the full extent of their civic responsibility, yet feel completely comfortable attacking and criticizing those who DO commit to running for office. People have been dealing with and electing "the lesser of two or three evils" for millennia. When you're unwilling to run for office yourself but want to Monday Morning quarterback those who do, you're part of the problem instead of the solution.
Hey- you're the one criticizing people not living up to your unpublished standards. There's nothing particularly judgy about expecting people to walk the walk if they talk the talk. That used to be a given. All I said was to put your action where your mouth is, so yeah, consider yourself corrected.
I agree with Terry. Many of us unwilling to run for office do NOT give up the right to criticize those who do. At least we don't unless this latest crew of Republican officials, Judges, and Justices complete their coup.
You don't have to run for office- you can be part of the election process- man the phone banks for your guy/gal. Build phone trees for voter registration and to remind people to get to the polls. Make arrangements for rides down to the polls. Elections are huge, dynamic events where there are many ways to support candidates of your choice.
At the end of the day, majority rules. If you're serious about protecting democracy, you do all you can to get your person in there but when they don't make the cut, you step up to the plate to keep the Republican from doing things like abolishing Roe v Wade and the EPA. Like it or not, we have a binary system. Stomping your feet and throwing a hissy fit by casting a "protest vote" doesn't do anything except silence your voice.
You need to understand the difference between your opinion and fact. You don't like Biden and try to project your beliefs on the whole of the Democratic party. There were and continue to be many Democrats who wanted him to run.
Katie Porter is great but she doesn’t have any momentum. The real problem is that anyone who wants the job isn’t qualified and those who are qualified won’t stoop to what it takes to run.
@Curt. Katie Porter still has to win her seat in the new CA47. I believe she will. Then she has two years to build momentum and a campaign. But I don't think she can lead the ticket over the top of folks like several governors and people like Cory Booker. I like Katie in Congress or as the VP candidate.
@Martha. Very good question. I have a preconception that they cannot, and this is based on observation of our politics over many years and many studies documenting the perverse voting habits of the American electorate. Still, my perceptions are not science. That said, choosing a candidate is partly an exercise in risk assessment - can my candidate win? I'd say that in our country a woman has the cards stacked against her in races for high executive responsibility, and that black people (male or female) face equally daunting odds against attracting just that little percentage of voters that create the majority, winning coalition. I'd say the risks are too high in 2024 for the Democrats to expend any little part of their potential-to-win on anything that is still a "social experiment" in our country or on any candidate who is testing the boundaries of acceptance by the electorate.
I declined to respond to this discussion's poll because it fails to include an "I have no frikkin' idea" option! (which is in no way the same as the "Too early to tell" option.)
An interesting screed speaking to this very question:
Face it. Biden was elected by the people who set an "Anyone but "ol Tweety" sign in their front yard - which supports your view. Personally, I'm not convinced anyone could have done much better in the situation, but I'm thinkin' it's time for him to start taking stock of the public's response to him, and reassess whether he has a viable campaign path for '24.
I'm including the following because its a good comment on what we all, Biden specifically, will be contending with:
I want a candidate who can pass the test. If I were representing a candidate, I'd ask her to voluntarily take a lie detector test and threaten the opponents to do same.
Well, obviously the corporatist establishment that controls the Democratic Party wanted him to win. They came to his rescue at a crucial time when his campaign was falling apart & he was in the worst position out of 5 contenders, pulled him through South Carolina, got 2 of his main rivals to pull out, 1 of whom (Buttigieg) had up to that point had placed ahead of Biden overall through the first 4 primaries, which together comprised no more than 5% of the delegates so far, just ahead of the largest & most important primary day, Super Tuesday. Fishy? You bet!
Yes, I love Katie Porter. Also aside from Warren, I also like Merkley, Inslee & Whitehouse a lot. Others that should make good candidates are Booker, Beto, Buttigieg, Schiff & Lieu, Grijalva, Tlaib, Jayapal, AOC & maybe Pritzker (not sure I spelled it right, governor of Illinois). Newsom is making waves, too, although there are some problems with him.
I think Katie Porter is qualified and probably doesn’t have a lot of skeletons hanging in her closet. She knows how to hit ‘em where it hurts. She’s tenacious and doesn’t step down from a fight. Her head and heart are in the right place. She is real people.
There's a huge difference in being eligible and qualified. She has absolutely no foreign policy experience. It's one thing to criticize, quite another to govern. Give her another ten years and she'll be a force to be reckoned with.
AOC telling Dana Bash that she won't commit to supporting Biden in 2024, if he's the candidate, was bush-league (sorry for the word-choice, W...). Biden should invite her to the White House and give her an assignment to prove her maturity & commitment to advancing Democrats' success: Bait Tucker Carlson to invite her onto his show on a frequent basis, to present Democrats' ideas to viewers stuck in their silo. Call him out as a cowardly misogynist, homophobic, racist who's afraid to discuss ideas. Promise her that the Democratic party will reward her very well if she succeeds in keeping Democrats in charge of the House & increasing their Senate presence: perhaps Veep in 2024? [If the Dems maintain power in the midterms, Biden needs to ditch Kamala from the Veep office by sending her to SCOTUS!)
All good ideas. Personally, I would counsel her to take Gillibrand's Senate seat and build alliances. She's razor sharp, but like a lot of younger people has a tendency to slide down the hill before she finds out where the stickers are. Once she's in the Senate she may not want the Presidency nearly as badly- the Senate is an incredibly powerful institution. From the Senate you can wield power with a certain level of security. See, this is why I don't like the idea of term limits. I'm not willing to limit AOC's time in either Chamber. Experience is valuable, especially in a crisis.
Being a good Legislator is one thing, but if you really want the power to make changes you need to know how to move legislation. I love AOC for changing the narrative and keeping a progressive agenda front and center. History informs us that an astonishing few have the political sophistication necessary to build the consensus necessary to pass big legislation in a democratic society. So far she's become very visible and is incredibly eloquent, but hasn't actually been part of any bills that have been made into law. Besides, the Constitution says you have to be at least 35 years old to hold the Office of the Presidency. AOC is 32. Kennedy was our youngest President thus far at 42. She has time to get some seasoning before she runs. I can't wait!
She simply isn't ready and doesn't have the support necessary to win. It was be tragic to waste such talent by putting her in a situation that she can't succeed, then she loses her House seat. Most Americans aren't ready to put the future of the free world in the hands of a 35 year old with four years experience as an elected official.
The Democratic National Committee IS A CORPORATION DEDICATED TO ELECTING DEMOCRATS TO ELECTIVE OFFICE. They have every right to promote whatever candidates they choose to the nomination. Why don't you understand this? Biden paid in five decades of service to the party, and he was much more popular with voters than Buttigieg, Warren, Booker, Beto, and ESPECIALLY Inslee. Tlaib and Jayapal are far too radical for Federal Office- I'd be surprised if either survive midterms. You just gave a list of great democratic Congressmen and Senators, but nobody who has a broad enough appeal to win a national election.
Upon reflection, you can include the whole Democratic party that is continually maligned by its own. Who else would we support? The wank-publicans? Certainly not the >real< Socialists, who in the first place back Putin in Ukraine, blaming the whole business on NATO imperialism on behalf of the US. On that issue, the wank-publicans sound >exactly like< real Socialists. And just to be clear, by the standard I've become passingly familiar with, Bernie is >nowhere near< being such a Socialist.
I don't think you have a grasp on the different political theories. Putin is part of an oligarchy, which is far from socialism. Bernie is a Democratic Socialist, which basically only means your focus is on society rather than capitalism- but they work well together, like in Scandinavia or Canada.
It has nothing to do with my grasp of theories. I'm aware of what you're saying. What I'm saying is that the Socialist newsletter I get considers the US and NATO the aggressor in Ukraine, and they don't even recognize Bernie as even an ally, let alone a Socialist. Perhaps you'd like to see what they have to say about things for yourself. I encourage it: https://www.wsws.org/en It's good to know what true Socialists have to say about things, for when the wank-publicans start their tired-assed bullshit dance about Democrats being Socialists. Anyone who buys that garbage are the ones who don't grasp the political theories. - and that's >exactly< what the wank-publicans prey on. You can sign up for a newsletter at that site. I highly recommend you subscribe to grasp what I'm trying to say.
Democratic Socialist countries include England, Italy, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Portugal, Greece, Ireland, Scotland, Brazil, Ecuador, and Peru- among others.
The Nazis called themselves socialists as well, but they weren't. What you've found are Trotskyites, which is a very early form of communism. It's a kind of socialism, but a very archaic and with very limited following. That website is seriously wonky, as well.
It actually please me to see >someone< speaking up for Biden here, for a change. Like I said in my comment, I didn't vote in the poll because I don't have a clue whether Biden should run again. I've heard so much from our own railing against what he has or hasn't done, yet I can't realistically believe >anyone< could have done any better, or even as well with the situation he inherited. >I< certainly wouldn't want to be in his position, and as I said weeks ago in a similar discussion in this forum, I don't think >any< of his critics - here or elsewhere - could have possibly done a better job - or avoided wilting, or even managed to remain rational in the circumstance, for that matter.
I think Biden has made mistakes, but few Presidents have had to operate in such a dysfunctional society. There hasn't been an attempted insurrection since 1861, COVID, mass shootings, and extracted us from two twenty year undeclared, unbudgeted wars AS WELL AS passing the most powerful BIPARTISAN infrastructure legislation in 75 years. While Afghanistan was horrific to watch, it was the Afghan government that failed, not Biden or the USA. We gave enough blood and treasure to stabilize them. Remember, at the beginning of the war when they were discussing strategic targets someone said that bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age would actually be progress.
Great Presidents aren't born, they become great because of the difficulty and crises they face in office. Historians don't even consider analyzing events until at least 25 years go by. The next two years will tell the tale. We'll either have a stronger nation or will be in the process of watching our democracy disintegrate- but very little of it will be Biden's fault, or within his purview to actually affect. At this point- as my old man used to say- I think we should "dance with the one what brung ya."
Well, if he runs again, >I'll< certainly vote for him. I like your take on Afghanistan. I'm surprised you didn't include that Biden was only following up on the agreement and planning ol' Tweety had already brokered and planned. If the pull-out is to be considered a failure, the blame should fall squarely on ol' Tweety for arranging it all, although Biden didn't have to go along with it. Of course, Biden had lots of other fish to fry, if memory serves! Besides, he'd have likely taken criticism for waste, or something, for not using what was already arranged and set in place, had he done anything else.
Even if Tweety didn't arrange it it had to happen. We were pouring blood and treasure down a black hole with no possibility of success. We can't change culture or build nations. We've never had any luck at it whatsoever. We went in to Afghanistan to get Bin Laden. When we got him, we should have left then. It wouldn't have changed anything except the number of American service people killed and amount of profit the military industrial complex posted for their shareholders. As unfortunate as the situation was and is, the Afghan people need to build their own nation on their own terms. We need to stop trying to Americanize the world.
Y'know, your comment here raises a question in my mind about who wanted Biden to win the nomination, in the first place. I know there's a push in Illinois in a primary to have a candidate win in the primary that the opposition thinks can be easily beaten in the general election. I'm not sayin' that's what happened with Biden, but it would >surely< have been an unpleasant surprise to ol' Tweety & the gang, particularly if ol' Tweety's supporters were trying to set up an easy win for ol' Tweety. Just a'conjurin' up a notion, here.
Oh, & maybe Dr.Reich himself. In any case, the Democratic Party should utilize his expert ability to see our problems, analyze them & come up with solutions, explaining them in a clear, concise way, with the help of his sketches, to make it easy for the public to understand.
I don't think it's about being a woman so much as being the right woman for our times. I had hopes for Harris, but something happened. Whether it's her fault or Biden's, she's not well-regarded. AOC often speaks for me, but she raises too many red flags for a lot of Democrats. Porter comes across as practical, hard working and super-smart.
fault? It is somebody's fault that the vp has disappointed you? Why do you have to assign blame? I'm sorry, I find the discourse here more than a little arrogant and preachy. yuck.
Sorry if that was offensive. I am more curious than anything else. Washington is a very male-centered town, and this is our first female vice president.
One more time. On what basis do you think - what is the data you have in hand - that allows you to think that any woman or any black man can be elected in 2024?
The DNC has, IMO, a perception of the world whereby the Clinton and Obama years were glorious*. People tend to be fearful of change until things become so awful that there's no other alternative. The DNC is not there yet -- much to our peril.
*Glorious -- despite their being a continuation of neoliberal Reaganomics. "How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the Neutron Bomb of Free Trade."
As candidates have come to rely on huge unlimited donations from wealthy donors in both party's, Neoliberal Wall-Street Democrats just keep clawing there way back to get the nomination like zombies in a horror movie. The DNC has lost all control over candidates in office or Manchin and Sinema would not be able to block Biden at every turn. Dirty coal money and states rights Joe Manchin deciding energy policy is such an obvious conflict of interest that the DNC should easily be able to put him in a box and make him come into line. They are worthless.
So you're voting for Trump? I'm always amused by how people find all these $20 words to throw around in criticizing a political process almost 250 years in the making, yet offer few- if any solutions. For every finger voters point at your "neo-liberal Wall Street Democrats" three fingers point back.
Absolutely. The DNC's average age seems like a bunch of old people who's memory isn't very good. They're no longer leading. Time to get out of the way. Old people don't always know better.
Obama passed the ACA. That's monumental, regardless of whether you recognize it or not. Biden passed the Infrastructure Act, which will be nearly as beneficial to Americans. Tell me, WTF did Bush or Trump do?
I honestly believe that Biden was the candidate that Trump wanted to oppose. Thought he had a lot of dirt on him. The primary election polls showed that Trump would have been trounced by other candidates.
Every Republican President since Lincoln- including Teddy Roosevelt and especially Eisenhower- set the nation back. TR's was much more insidious- but we probably would never have seen an ascendant militant Japan had he not encouraged them to develop their own version of the Monroe Doctrine in Asia. They took it to heart.
If you mean Bernie, it's because he is not and has never been a Democrat. He should have run as an independent, but he knew there were obstacles if he tried to join the party just to get elected.
Biden has been a fixture in DNC politics for four decades. Remember, the job of the DNC isn't to find the best candidate, but to find the most electable party faithful. They have their own mandate, and it's unlikely that an AOC or other new face, regardless of how impressive, will shoot past someone who has raised millions of campaign dollars for the party.
I believe you nailed it....'a fixture in DNC politics for four decades". Sounds less like an accolade and more like a problem, especially if one is a Millennial or a Zoomer.
The funny part is that Millennials and Zoomers will absolutely believe in it when they've been in the business for four decades. Meritocracy has its merits. Nobody wants to spend a lifetime working towards a goal and contributing to a greater community only to have some upstart snot nose who thinks their eighteen times around the planet has provide absolute and empirical truths. Everyone thinks they have a new approach, new ideas, new processes- but it's a rare bird that actually does. Very little new under the sun- it's just that the snot nosed have all the answers before they learned all the questions.
I guess if you're going to go hammering on about 'data', then you should share with the rest of us the data that supports the contrary. None of us are really expert pollsters here. We're just going by what we've seen and read and to some degree our hopes. Enlighten us please.
1. Please do not throw shade with the patronizing phrase "hammering on." We are all volunteers here, and there is nothing in my contract that requires me to tolerate time wasting and rude address.
Not quite sure where you're coming from but it seems you are perhaps a bit too tense? I am not a volunteer here....not sure how paying for a newsletter qualifies. I came here for information not to trade insults. But thanks for the links. PS, 'hammering on' is not an insult or patronizing, its simply a way of saying your responses are perhaps a bit too demanding??
If you are not a volunteer here, then you are being paid? If you think these demands are too demanding, you may find the information I provided in response to your question for data sources a bit of a slog. For which, of course, you can thank me, and you are welcome. Nevertheless, this isn't astrophysics. It's necessary to clearly seeing the situation in which we live and the consequences we are facing if we fail to grasp the situation.
First off Biden has to offer to step down. The worst thing we could do right now would be to primary a sitting President and polarize what little unity the left has. If he indeed encourages a primary and a dynamic, electable woman comes forward, I'll vote for her. It won't be VP Harris, for better or worse. Biden would do better than she in 2024. Right now there isn't anyone who has the X factor to win the Presidency over the incumbent.
@Hyla. It is a rhetorical question; I won't speak for Martha, but I don't need more data because there is plenty of data showing the up hill battle that candidates of color and women face in politics. If you think someone can win, what do you base that opinion upon?
It's absolutely reasonable to expect people to back up their assertions with facts. If you can't supply the facts, you know what they say about opinions.
I also agree that winning in November is going to focus the direction for the remaining 2 years of the Biden presidency. Get out the vote people, your life depends upon it. Think of what would happen if the GOP regained power? We'd become an autocratic society of aggressive men telling women and minorities what to do, no environmental or climate protections and democracy would be a thing of the past.
Biden isn’t tough enough snd has his head in the sand. The MoscowMitch judge deal is insane. Kavanaugh impeachment proceedings should have been done right after his inauguration. Ditch the damn filibuster, we know the GQP will if they regain power
We need to confront the republicans. Gavin Newsom seems willing by taking on desantis. Blast de Wine over the raped 10 year old. Call republicans sick and disgusting. Vote Vets is going after Walker in Georgia. Texas tattletale squealer snitch stool pigeon plan is a copy of the old East German Stasi spy system.
first of all, I love the question about Biden, and I don't agree that we should wait for the midterms to discuss. Rs and SCOTUS are doing damage NOW. I'm in no position to be age-ist (I'm 66) but I agree that Biden should NOT run again. I agree with you that it's as much about style as age. He wants to unify but you cannot work with Mitch M and crew. they are NOT reasonable people. We need a fighter , someone who will take the case big-time to the country. sorry, it's not Bernie or E Warren. they cannot get the country behind them. I'm from Ohio. I also like Sherrod Brown but you'e got to WANT to be POTUS to do the job. Not sure he wants it. I like Gavin N a lot - also like all that I figure all the dirt on him is already out (at least I think). I can get behind Kamala but not sure she can win. My prediction is that it will be Gavin versus DeSantis in 2024. I do think Liz C and Jan 6th committee are doing real damage to Trump, THANK GOD. in any event, we need SCOTUS reform ASAP
If we wait we’re roadkill. Immediate steps need to be taken to counteract current damage. Talk of possible 2024 candidates could invigorate Dem enthusiasm. The Dem Party machinery is corrupt and stagnant.
Great Klatsh, Robert and Heather! I was dead last on the poll, because I believe it would be better to keep the administration and President we already have. Look at how refreshing it has been to observe the Jan 6th investigation's work! We have not seen this kind of satisfying expose of wrongdoing in a long time. One of our oldest leaders; Nancy Pelosi was responsible for keeping the obstructionists off the committee and allowing it to work! The dignity and diversity and the professional work is so nice to see and hear. Biden has made a stab at righting some of the wrongs done to our women. It's a start. He is so much better than anyone on the other side. He should use his executive power to keep our Constitutional right to vote! I see a shrill minority who want Autocracy / tyranny. Not the majority. The votes for any Federal election should be secured. If it is sullied by gerrymandering and the Electoral College we will lose our freedom. Changing presidents will not prevent that if votes are taken away from voters.
I agree with Ms. Blair and not because I'm a year older than Joe Biden. . Like many commenting here, I'm not for removing our great Democratic leaders just because of their calendar age, especially those still doing amazing jobs on a daily basis, like Biden and Pelosi. And we must always remember the alternative: Autocracy. But rather than fear mongering we need to message about the achievements of this thin majority and talk constantly about what we could do with a more robust majority after the midterms.
I would add that President Biden might consider taking away committee assignments (and using other means that might be possible), to send a strong message to those two Senators and others who are betraying our Democracy to the point that it is in peril!
Biden's low approval rating is unwarranted. His Administration has accomplished amazing things. But few Democrat campaign managers rally around him. They leave him floundering alone. They spend grassroots funds on fear mongering and focusing voters attention on Trump and MAGA Republicans, which depresses Democrat voters and energizes Trump's supporters. This is the sorry state of the Biden Administration's public face. You may not like Biden's moderate milquetoast style. You may wish for a more youthful energy. But is that reason enough to step back and allow Democrats to loose the congressional midterm elections?
George Sell ; I wish there was a way to message All main stream media that consistently cite polls that are showing low low numbers. and tell them to stop lying. Ever since there was reporting early on in tRump's campaign that accused him of giving bribes to a polling site, I realized that money and corruption is his M.O. and believed it. My latest strategy is to contribute to Inequality Media Civics which has tech savvy young people on Tik Tok, Snapchat and Twitter getting the truth out about Republican Regressives moves against Democracy and the rule of law. If I can be educated, why not youth?
President Biden is a fine man and a comsumate statesman. However, his image, in this bizaare political cycle, is too soft and too "business as usual." Unfortunately voters seem to be enamored with star power. President Obama's gift of "presence" made people pay attention. His speeches commanded attention. Democrats need a candidate who has the ability to excite both Democrats and Independents.
Charles Herro ; President Obama's gift of "presence" made people pay attention. Obama made some serious mistakes with the bail out of the big banks with no attempt to help homeowners harmed by their gambling with people's money, let alone consequences in the form of penalties. He also supported trade agreements that left the working people behind. Democrats don't need a candidate who has the ability to excite Democrats and Independents who cannot deliver!
I absolutely agree Laurie, I was terribly disappointed that he listened to the Republican economists and accepted their erroneous statements that the banks were "too big to fail" They deserved to fail, and their entire Boards of Directors, including the CEO's should have been prosecuted for wholesale theft. They didn't deserve a penny of "welfare" they received, and it was welfare, unearned taxpayer dollars, which many spent on bonuses, lavish parties for their managers, and stock buy-backs at we, the tax-payers expense.
As you have admitted, if the DNC hadn't cheated, we'd be deep in Bernie's second term. Will the Dems wake up, or do they prefer to lose than allow real change? (We know the answer, they would rather lose.)
Mike Benson ; There is also the Corporate owned media that Bernie himself cautiously mentioned was not fair to him. Add the purging of votes and misinformation about voting dates and times, removal of polling places and drop boxes, gerrymandering and other dirty tricks, like giving tRump free media exposure (remember the 'breaking news' with a picture of tRump on the phone?) . Not even the 'heir apparent' Hillary Clinton got that! We should not blame Democrat voters when the deck is so clearly stacked against them.
Agree. There is different thinking. Different solutions that people think is the way to go. But Democrats do not want to lose and surrender the country to the corrupt GOP.
Definitely someone more progressive. I am 77 and progressive contributing to and writing about the woman's right to abortion, the rights of all to death with dignity, and against Russia and Putin's lust for empire and to be crowned Czar.
How? When repug regressives are blocking voting and filibustering everything and now have the 'advantage' of a stacked 'Supreme' court? they are going after laws on the books for decades that are popular, just because they can! Meanwhile the criminally wealthy are behind their every move, turning workers into slaves and disappearing the middle class and ending education as we know it. the Electoral College should be ended and a lot of Democrats would love to see that huge change!
We are at the time of needed generational change in American government. A picture of the leaders of Congress or the Surpreme Court looks like a social event at a nursing home.
That is not to discount the need for their wisdom. The wisdom of elders will be needed if America is to transition to a government fit for the 21st Century instead of one rooted in 18th Century compromises to slavery and genocide.
Both political parties are clearly to blame for not having succession planning. The risks now of sliding into a Central Asian type of dictatorship (nicely termed a "Presidential Republic") are clearly present. The lack of developing well-rounded and effective leaders across generations and social classes may be one of the failures of our elitist political class that costs us a democracy.
We need to get rid of the Electoral College and Citizens United, and now the Stacked Rogue 'Supreme' Court! (among other things, like anti voter laws and other un Democratic policies).
I'm 72 and I don't want him to run again! I want younger people in government! We have a lower age limit for the presidency; it's time to put an upper age limit on it. And Feinstein and Pelosi need to step down too.
I agree, but they have not been mentoring others to take their place. That is the sad part. Elizabeth Warren could replace Nancy Pelosi in a heartbeat, but would she? As for DiFi, there are some great Black women who would be great to represent California and hold their ground on principles.
I also agree. I love President Biden and applaud all he has done and all he tried to do but we need younger leaders. And, perhaps, tougher leaders. Elizabeth Warren would have made a great president and I love the idea of her as speaker.
She's a Senator! She'd have to run for the House of Representatives, wouldn't she?
I believe you are correct. Perhaps Senate Majority Leader.
Yes, and why would she leave the Senate to chance a run for the House?
Cathleenguthrie; Right, it may not be the case for all Reps in the House but I believe most them want to be senators.
And zero guarantee she would win!
No, Speaker of the House does not have to be a House Member, but it may be a stretch to be Senator & Speaker.
Elizabeth Warren would make a more powerful Majority Leader than Schumer has been! The Dems just need to lose their nice guy image for Awhile & act tougher & be stronger with their words!
Now that you mention it, I guess you're right. Republicans were talking about making Trump speaker.
Just think of it, Warren Speaker of the House while simultaneously a leading senator! She'd be awfully busy, but I think she could handle it, & in those positions steer Congress & our government overall back in the right direction.
You can't simultaneously be in the Senate and Congress. It's unconstitutional.
Yes, Speaker of the House does have to be a member of Congress.
Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 5
"The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."
Does this Article say the Speaker MUST be a Member of the House? I don’t see that in your quote, only that House Representatives shall chose … look deeper, maybe.
It says the House shall "chuse" (interesting spelling) their Speaker, but nowhere does it specify that Speaker has to be a member of the House.
Never happened yet. A real, real gamble. Precedent?
No. Why would she?
EW is a Senator, not in the House.
Elizabeth Warren is in the Senate, not the House. She would not become Speaker.
Inflation was just as bad in the 70s & especially the 80s when Reagan spewed his trickle down economics plans that never trickled anywhere but up & began the Oligarchy we live with now! Biden didn’t wish inflation on the Nation & has done what he could to counteract it with only moderate success. Keep thinking how much worse our lives would be if the big orange idiot was in charge!!! These same Oligarchs are showing their displeasure with Dems in charge by raising their prices on gas & food just bec they can without losing a single customer! If only we could boycott those companies, the power would go back to the customer where it belongs!! Don’t blame Biden. Passing a wealth tax might help but it could also backfire on the populace! There’s no easy answer.
Your comments deserve a reply, and I hope someone with better knowledge than mine will respond.
For starters, though, President Joe Biden is NOT an inept, feeble old man. He won the election by more than 7 million votes, so he was definitely chosen by the majority of Americans who voted. I believe he is doing a good job, but he is limited by a Congress with a slim majority, and one in which the republican minority cares nothing about our country and makes progress doubtful due to their lack of participation in moving our country forward. President Biden has been faced with handling a multitude of serious problems, and unless the republicans in Congress decide to become loyal to the oath to our Constitution, little will be accomplished.
I don't believe for a second your explanation of President Biden's association with the World Health Organization in that he would give away our birthright! You need to add your sources for this to inform people how they can check on your statements which I consider to be untrue.
ts1213
I believe you're watching too much FOX News!
I trust NOTHING they say or publicize.
ts1213
This is what I choose to believe about President Biden and his action to return the U.S. to the World Health Organization:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/01/22/scientists-applaud-biden-decision-rejoin-world-health-organization/4243377001/
Obviously science agrees with President Biden's actions, and conservatives don't seem to believe science!
TS....why do you keep trolling us?
Where is your proof of that? Because you sound like either QAnon's foolishness or a FOX Entertainment channel's follower. I hope I am as "Inept" at his age but then the way the American people behaved when we needed just a few weeks of everyone pulling together to slow the pandemic and large numbers were whining "what about MEEEEEEEEE, I don't like a mask" instead of "what about US" I'm not so sure about their intelligence anyway. Considering what he was left with I think we could do much worse...and I don't agree with every individual decision he makes but as a "whole performance, we could do worse, Particularly with Mansion and Sinema hanging around his neck like 2 albatross'.
Runaway inflation is impacting the entire world not just the USA. Should we blame Biden for the inflation in Canada, England, Germany, etc. etc. on and on? Were your statement concerning the World Health Organization correct, I do not believe that any future President would honor that agreement if it were detrimental to our country. What is your point?
The thing is Biden will get blamed by average Americans.
Warren couldn't replace Pelosi as House Speaker, but could & should replace Schumer as Senate Majority Leader if she can't win the presidency, which is where I think she should be for the salvation of our nation.
Yes.
Elizabeth Warren is a Senator, Nancy is a Congresswoman - oranges and apples. For a replacement we need someone who is currently in Congress, has a following, is both well liked and forceful. I can't think of any women right now, but Adam Schiff would fit the bill. I admire AOC but she is too outspoken, you need a person who stands up for what they perceive as right. but willing to compromise, and that certainly isn't Kevin McCarthy. I'd like to see Elizabeth Warren as Senator pro tem, I think she'd be better than Chuck Schumer and way, way, better than stick it in a drawer McConnell.
Some other women in the House I think are good leaders are Pramila Jayapal, Katie Porter & Rashida Tlaib.
Katie Porter, definitely yes, Pramila Jayapal maybe, Rashida Tlaib definitely not. The House Speaker must be a leader that others will willingly follow. Katie is such a person and she has the courage of her convictions, Rashida, while I personally admire her, is too foul mouthed (again like me) to be a leader. Leadership demands respect, if you don't have that respect you can't lead. Unfortunately, this is an error too many women (and an equal number of men) make. Joe Biden is an excellent leader because he never publicly demeans himself.
I didn't know that about Rashida, but not surprising among the younger generations.
Adam Schiff is a great choice for speaker. Also Jamie Raskin, but wasn't the question here who, if not Joe in 24, for president?
Fay Reid; Adam Schiff would be a good choice, but I will say, Katie Porter is kind of the Elizabeth Warren of the House, and former student of Warren, Both Schiff and Porter are pretty sharp, IMO.
<off topic> - Congrats, on the Sunday Caption for 9/3/22
I agree that Katie Porter would be an excellent choice also, she's highly intelligent, young, and very pro-active, She is the kind of Leader we Democrats need.
Thank you for your congratulations.
I second the congratulations, Fay. Good one!
Thank you
I agree that Katie Porter would be an excellent choice.
I don’t think Schumer does his job.
Even if Warren was willing to step down from the Senate and run for Congress- and she won- she would enter the House as a Freshman Congressman. If she made a play for Pelosi's seat- which she wouldn't and for good reason- she would have to depend on the entire 435 members of Congress electing her Speaker. It would never happen. Liz would never leave the Senate for anything short of the White House or SCOTUS anyway.
That’s it. None of these people are grooming those behind them.
Sure they are- just not necessarily the ones you want them to groom.
Who? I don’t see the evidence.
His name has slipped my mind, but I heard that Pelosi prefers a relatively young, good-looking charismatic black man, who was a member of the Trump impeachment committee, & more recently gave a powerful, morally based rebuke to Clarence Thomas. He is apparently rather centrist & corporatist, so there would hardly be any change ideologically.
Cory Booker? I thought he was in the Senate.
Elizabeth Warren is in the Senate, not the House.
...which is why I said, "Even if Warren was willing to step down from the Senate and run for Congress". Someone above is trying to spin a strategy that somehow Warren becomes Speaker of the House while still a Senator, and I"ve not been very successful in explaining why this is loony tunes.
I agree. While the Condtitution does NOT expressly state that the leader needs to be a member, it's never happened. Most likely would entail judicial opinion on precident and end up in the SC. (Talk about "Looney Tunes"!)
The Constitution expressly states that the election of Congressional officers will be executed by Congress. That means the Speaker is in control. Full stop.
SAMIAN...GREAT POINT!!! THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE CLARITY. MU H APPRECIATED.
Warren is a Senator not in the House. She could replace Schumer tho.
I would love to see her replace Schumer
You have to be a resident of NY to be an elected official. Warren is a Constitutional Law Professor at Harvard who has been living in Boston for years while teaching. This is why she's Massachusetts' Senator and not New York's.
Why would Warren want to give up her Senate seat in Mass for one in NY? Schumer isn't going anywhere soon. He worked his entire life to be nominated Majority Leader and he's not going to give it to Warren- and Pelosi isn't going to abandon him, either.
I don't like any set, hard & fast limits like that. People age differently. Age has apparently slowed & hampered Biden. He's not as sharp as he used to be. It has obviously affected Feinstein adversely. Trump never was all there, but he certainly hasn't gotten any better with age.
On the other hand, Bernie is still sharp, but he does seem as old as he is, which is quite old, & he had a heart attack in 2020. Now look at Robert Reich. I think he is well into his 70s, and he is still as sharp as ever, and appears pretty vigorous. And Elizabeth Warren, who is also in her 70s by now although she doesn't look it, is as sharp as a tack, one of the best minds in politics, with seemingly endless energy, always, like Reich, coming up with great solutions to our problems, with a plan for everything. We missed a great opportunity by not electing her last time. I hope we don't make that same mistake next time, but I'm sure we will, as neither the electorate nor the PTB that influence elections are smart enough to realize that someone like her is just what we need during these critical times.
you're correct on all counts
Thank you for your like. We have similar opinions and that is always nice to find.
Eileen Lion, I may have been mistaken that you were liking what I wrote. But on second glance you may have been responding to Jaime Ramirez, who I don't completely concur with. I may just be wanting to have found someone who agrees with me to that degree (on all counts) but may not have found that here. I am going to learn more on how to use my "collapse" button.
No I don't agree. Age is not the problem. People talking about age at all are missing the point. We can only elect the right leaders when we know the qualities we need and value them in ourselves first. Wise people choose wise leaders, and wise leaders get better with age and recuse themselves when they know it's best for the office they inhabit.
I agree 100%. Warren was my top pick for Pres in 2020 & Kamala was 2nd! The electorate has to be educated to put trust in electing a woman for President before it will happen, I’m sure of this!
I would add Schumer to the list as he's proven that he's not a leader, not charismatic, not in touch and not a fighter. And this is the time for fighters.
Let's jut throw everybody out. Let's just throw all leadership out and stand in a state of real confusion and let the void be filled by Trumpets who TELL US what to think. I don't agree. Unless you can do it better and are running against him, I don't like to be about getting rid of the only ones who are for us. Schumer stands for the people like you and me. When YOU stand for something different then you will be able to see who is even more what we need to represent us. I only like to see criticism from those who can put their money where their mouth is. You are entitled to better leadership but only when you can pick it. No throwing of our GEMS out!
I used to be prickly about any negative comments about Joe because I really like the guy, but it's apparent to me now that the loud, persistent voices that half the potential voters listen to tend to come from the right. Virtually none, with the exception of AOC, Katy Porter and a few others, come from the left, and the strongest among them, the most forthright among them, are derided not only by the right but by the establishment DNC and DSCC as well.
If Joe can change his approach, which would require his getting smarter, more savvy advisors, not unusual for a President halfway through his term, then perhaps he can pull a rabbit out of a hat. I'd be delighted if he can do that, but at this point I'm doubtful that can and will occur.
We need Democratic leaders who can make Democrats and the 'undecided' stand up and cheer. FDR did that, as did JFK, Obama and unfortunately Reagan on the other side. Perhaps one will emerge but if we don't keep both houses we'd best have a primary for the 2024 election, find a dynamic leader, or the nation will continue to sink.
Agree. The oy reason Biden is "too old" is because the media and our culture feed us garbage stereotypes about age, perpetuated by younger people who want seniority. There are countries where that hadn't happened -- where age and wisdom were respected -- at least until American-style media began to influence opinion. The non-discriminatory reason that, I think, Biden shouldn't run again, barring significant change, is because, as Porter writes, he's not sufficiently dynamic, etc.
People in politics should be forced to "retire" at the age that Social Security provides full benefits. There should be TERM LIMITS for ALL elected elected offices AND "supreme" Court justices. BTW - Our Constitution does NOT say that Supreme Court justices are appointed for life, but rather says that they can keep their jobs if they continue in "good standing". This is highly subjective as the current "supreme" court majority appears to be religious extremists and their recent decisions are NOT "good" in my opinion. TERM LIMITS solves that. The reality is HUGE money, dark money and "shell" companies, can easily prop up people that the elites WANT to do their bidding. If you actually want to clean up the corruption you MUST take ALL PRIVATE MONEY out of our election and judicial appointment system. It is very easy to purchase people to stop any progress. (Not saying that this is what happened to Sinema and Manchin, but it should be looked into.) One point about Biden, if he was a stronger President, he would threaten to expose those politician's dirty secrets if they did NOT vote for his progressive, for the people, policies. Why doesn't he do this?
R u saying u want another loud mouth that tries to control the narrative & doesn’t listen to anyone who’s smarter than himself! We just tried that you know!
No. There are positive alternatives to "perceived wimp" and "over-controlling loud mouth"
Agree 100%!
The electorate loved Reagan because he was in the movies and television, relatively handsome,and had an excellent voice. The electorate, at large, never looked at his inability to govern. I had several arguments with my Mother and Aunt, (both of whom couldn't vote, thank goodness, because they were still Canadians,) because I wouldn't support Ronnie Baby. I knew from his bungling Governorship of California that he was all talk and no ability, but they kept saying "but Jimmy Carter wears jeans in the white house" - as though that mattered a damn. This is the sort of thinking we have to contend with. As I said, I'm glad they couldn't vote, but their are millions just like them who look only at the candidates appearance and speaking ability and not at all at his/her ability to lead,
Fortunately or unfortunately, a candidate's appearance and speaking ability are central to his/her ability to lead.
Very well said!
Schumer hardly stands for anything. He's weak, corporatist & isn't that principled, easily caving in.
We are on a forum meant to analyze political questions. This forum's administrator, mentor & leader has invited us to do give our opinions, not to take over the politicians' jobs, & as citizens with lots of opinions, we are more than willing to oblige.
You can say what you want, Jamie, But you won't find agreement with me by trying to underscore points with no real backing or replacement thoughts. Waving the flag of rights does not help either or emphasizing how strongly you feel does not work with me. How you feel or any of your emotions does not matter to me. It is not my responsibility, either, to make you feel heard. I do not agree with you about Schumer. To me he is the best of what we have at this time and we need more support to get his good ideas through.
Schumer's main job was to try to broker peace between Sanders & Manchin. That proved impossible, because Bernie had to attack Manchin ad hominem for not giving Bernie a victory with his Build Back Better, without compromises. If Bernie compromised, Manchin would've gotten credit, too. Instead, we got nothing.
Sadly, I cannot fault Manchin for deciding he can trust McConnell more than he can trust the Democratic circular firing squad
There was far more compromise than there should've been. The bill started at $10 trillion over 10 years (1T/yr), & Manchin whittled it down to $1.5T, <1/6 of its original price tag, & Manchin still rejected it. The coal baron Manchin has been playing the Democratic Party on behalf of McConnell & the Republicans with his intransigence & deception to the detriment of the entire nation with BBB, voting rights & other issues, repeatedly contradicting his own assertions.
Schumer isn’t the only one who stands for people like us. Elizabeth Warren has much more energy and is for us.
I really like her too, Maggie. I like to watch her videos and learn to assert myself the way she does. She is a good role model for me. You too?
Absolutely.
Cynthia. Completely agree….feel the same way about Biden and Schumer. People tend to put too much emphasis on charisma and age. I watch Biden on the go constantly and considering the opposition to everything from republicans he has accomplished so much.
As far as running again, I would suspect he would prefer not to; however, if he’s the best one for the job..as he was in ‘20…and is in good health and feels it is in the Country’s best interests, then maybe he would.
Absolutely correct!
Well past time, imo.
Feinstein has always been terrible. Now she’s senile as well. She should go.
Agree
A senile Feinstein is more competent than traitors like Hawley or Cruz.
True, but we also have plenty of good options to replace her here in CA. She could easily be replaced by a younger progressive who would win her spot.
That’s for sure! We have an abundance of traitors, criminals & unethical Rethugs in there lost Party!
But she’s still senile. If our country is to survive we need young and vital people running things, not someone falling asleep at the wheel.
At least less harmful
That's really not saying much.
That’s hilarious
Oy! Age discrimination involves treating an applicant or employee less favorably because of his or her age. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) forbids age discrimination against people who are age 40 or older.
ADEA, https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/age-discrimination-employment-act-1967
Some states have mandatory retirement for judges at age 70. 75 in Florida. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_retirement
Don’t forget about Schumer…definitely his best years are in the past
I am going to give you the award for very polite.
Wow, again! If you disagree with some of his actions, people, just come out and say so. Please be specific...
...assuming he had good years
Wow.
Feinstein maybe, but Pelosi still is a very wise & cagey person.
Cagey maybe; wise -- not in 'my' definition of wise. Too much to elaborate upon with respect to her various betrayals of the progressive democratic agenda but one word --Cuellar -- should give you a hint regarding my stance here. If you're making a case 'for' her and 'against' ageism, okay, I get it. But I'm never gonna go with 'wise'.
When Pelosi gave her support to Cuellar, she completely lost my respect. He is everything we’re fighting against, especially us here in Texas! His opponent could have used that boost and would’ve probably put her over the top. I was seriously livid the day I read Pelosi did this, because it felt just like what it was, a betrayal.
To all of us who donated, wrote letters, texted, knocked on doors, et al, to put Democrats back in the majority throughout our government, then she turned around and voted for a Republican masquerading as a Democrat. He’s no different than Manchin or Senema.
she and the democratic establishment are terrified of the progressives... they would do anything to stop them from getting seats, even endorsing an anti-abortion guy, like Cuellar.
Absolutely!
Agree
AGREED!
I would suggest 60 as the upper limit. 64 is old sure, but once you hit 65 the demenSHAH starts really kicking in. Anyone think 55 or younger?
How old are you, Daniel? I think you must be a young whippersnapper. I'm 81, and I don't agree that 'demenSHAH' sets in once you hit 65. I was still working at 72, and I would have continued if our school board had not cut the Adult Education Program! You can't assume all people are out of it once they're past 65! At 55, a person would have a 20 year range to become President of the U.S. Age does bring wisdom in many "old" folks, and to me, 35 seems quite young and lacking the experience age brings. I realize there are exceptions!
Agree! No ageism!
Aging is real, and it's silly to deny it. Reagan was entering senility in his last term. The executive demands of the presidency require too much mental agility and stamina for the elderly. I would pick 64-68 as a reasonable but soft age limit for the first term. That would mean leaving after two terms at 72 -75 or so.
David Watkins ; I think individuals should be evaluated as there is no 'one size fits all'.
Laurie, agree.
We really don't have enough exposure in the primaries to adequately evaluate the candidate for mild cognitive deficits. The president's staff does everything they can to shield their candidate from situations that might lead them to ex[pose their deficiencies. Biden was always a mush mouth. Is it worse now? I don't know.
Absolutely!
Seriously, not every old person gets dementia. What a bizarre concept. And at 65 no less. That is closed, shut down thinking, imo. Not enlightened.
I totally agree. When I first moved to Sacramento in 1961 we had a Judge, Peter Shields, who at 90 years of age walked 7 miles to and from his home in east Sacramento to the Court House. He was sharp as a tack in his decisions too. There should be a way, however for removing a person who is obviously incapable of doing their job.
I just think the job of President is too difficult for someone in their 80's.
Liz ; clearly it depends on the person.
Hi Marge, Wish I could agree with you. Very impressed with your own personal mental and physical fitness, but you’re clearly exceptional (check out the folks at any senior center or Road Scholar trip.) While some elders maintain sharp minds and physical vigor, it’s normal and commonplace for seniors to lose short term memory and physical strength and endurance. That’s why most folks seek to retire in old age. Speaking from experience as a 70 year old with debilitating arthritis, and - what was I talking about?
Craig ; LOL! familiar geezer territory! But does an occasional memory hiccup make a person unable to make decisions? Remember when people were exhorted to not trust anyone over 30? If you can, you are unqualified because you are too old! Also, many people who are fit and engaged in mainstream culture do not hang out at senior centers!
I don’t mean to imply that seniors lack wisdom that many indeed gain from a lifetime of learning and deep experience. To the contrary! My concern has more to do with energy level, mental and physical acuity, and life expectancy in old age. The president has an enormously complex, challenging and exhausting job as the chief executive. Actions taken at that level of responsibility have huge consequences.
The FAA requires commercial airline pilots to retire at age 65. I doubt that the pilot of Air Force One is anywhere near the same age (79) as his no. 1 passenger. (Let’s hope not!)
Biden is a hell of a lot better than the other side of the aisle. And he is the incumbent, voted in by a clear majority in spite of all the dirty tricks from the other side, and unfortunately, installed into our very system of laws, apparently.
Craig ; It is a slippery slope to diagnose the President of the United States, just because some people do not like his style. He can still deliver complicated intelligent cogent speeches. Trump obviously has some mental issues. Were we able to get rid of him? I also point out once more that our very system has serious flaws that anyone, no matter their competence will be hamstrung by. Electoral College, an activist 'Supreme Court' dominated by incompetent judges who do not reflect the will of the people, and do not understand the Constitution and think they can thumb their noses at it, the filibuster and gerrymandering, just for starters.
Ha ha!
👏👏👏 You tell ‘em!!
👏
No. Absolutely not. With age comes wisdom, at least if you’ve got half a brain. I was just getting started in my fifties. Don’t be ageist. It’s not helpful.
60!!!
64!!!
Bernie is 80. There is no one more clear and articulate than Bernie anywhere. Watch his committee hearings. Nothing Lindsay Graham or any republicans say rattles him. He stays on target. I am hoping Bernie continues to stay in the Senate until he is at least 90.
I agree. Bernie had some years but his energy is still there. He’s sharp mentally emotionally and passionate.
Daniel H.; No, not me. We should be the judge on that at the ballot box. In normal times Biden would not have gotten my vote, but these are not and were not normal times in 2019. The truth is after the trumpster, Biden winning was like, 'thank you Jesus, yes I will go back to church someday!'
The republicans foisted the evil dump on us and couldn't be bothered to or were to afraid to correct their mistake. I will give them a break right here, one time, I want to think the R's did not know he was that evil, after all they (R's) are not infallible humans. But we should make them pay for it, anyway. Vote, vote, vote, our lives depend on it.
The problem with your argument, DW, is the statement "I want to think the R's did not know he was that evil" is undone by the Republicans themselves. Because I am retired, I was able to watch the entire January 6th insurrection LIVE, from beginning to end. I was on the phone with my friend in DC, whom I had called to make sure he was safe. I heard about Charlie (alias Kevin) McCarthy's phone calls pleading with trump to call off his dogs. Then, when it was over, like the good little puppet he is, he rushed to Florida to kiss trump's rump and assure him he believed everything the trumpster said. All but a small handful of the Republicans bent over backwards to laud and acclaim the trumpster as their hero. Why do you think the January 6th House committee was only able to seat 2 Republicans?
Yes Fay, that is a problem. My thought is that back when the 'powers that be', not talking about the mouth pieces McConnell and McCarthy, decided to put up the highly manipulable con man for the highest office in the land they didn't realize he was such a 'loose cannon' swinging in every direction, all the time. With the "I want to think", I was giving the once viable, worthy and workable republicans, as part of the two party legislative system we have, 'the benefit of doubt'. Honestly, I don't think Trump knew the power of the presidency or what he would or could do with it. Result, Jan 6, and beyond.
Love the "Charlie" reference, so apt!
Yikes! Most people that age & quite a bit older I know are fine. Wisdom acquired through age is an asset, & so is experience.
I think even 70's are okay. But upper 70's no. We need a mix of ages.
I'd go for 70.
I don’t think it’s an age cutoff. It’s energy. When it wanes, whatever age. It’s time to not run for president of a big country or take on huge jobs.
I agree, Maggie mac. I would hate to see age quotas.
You are not seventy with a brain-full of good ideas, obviously.
I think Fay mentioned she was close to 80, & her brain appears to be working very well.
Thank you Jaime,. but I'm closer to 90 which I will be in March,
I definitely think Feinstein is way too old too. We need fresh blood in our deomocrat constituency
I totally disagree! That’s like saying that Robert Reich is too old to give his opinion and reach!
Teach!
Crap, Judith! We need quality in government, not ageism. I can't believe you say this on this channel. Wisdom can grow with age. Don't blame age. Our older politicians are the best thing we have going for us, as Democrats. Your desire for more rules show YOU to be rigid. Maybe your age is causing you to not be able to change. Youth is not the answer. Wisdom is. If I could put a thumbs down on your comment, I WOULD.
Feel free to give me a thumbs down. If only wisdom automatically came with age. It doesn't. I agree that we need quality in government, but I also believe we need fresh ideas from younger minds. We've already said there needs to be a minimum age; why not a maximum? That would save us from people like Feinstein who clearly needs to go but refuses to step down. I'd be fine with having people beyond the age limit in some capacity as advisors, but I'd like younger people as my elected officials.
Mitch McConnell and Lindsay Graham should step down as well. All the old people should step down and let some younger people put this country back in order.
I agree that both mcconnell and graham should step down. And for your information it's not about whether someone is old, the most successful people to effect changes are the ones who are connected to the American public and work to create better environments for all. Some younger people are just as stuck in their conservatism as the older ones can be. Witness the Supreme Court installments done by trump! They are young in age, old in thoughts.
Okay, maybe "old" isn't the issue but some of these men have outdated thought patterns and are stuck in some old fashioned ideas that the world has evolved past and they haven't. Younger people can be offered ideas that they may at least chew on but many older politicians are stuck in their thinking and won't budge from it. They are blocking progress and should be voted out,
I’m 82 and still have good judgement! I want Feinstein & Pelosi to stay in power!
Biden has been doing a good job and when I think he should have been tougher, we don’t have the entire picture like he does.
Couldn't agree with you more!!! Your good judgement of Feinstein and Pelosi is not using age to degrade the work they have done and still do. I look up to these leaders with MY good judgement. I am 65 and they are roles models to me of good judgement, dedication, and bravery to continue to work inside of such opposition and even threat (Pelosi). I need to do more reading, in fact, to get more background on each of these wonderful individuals who have not "lost value as they age" as ageism would have it. They are big shoes to fill in the democratic party. I want to follow their example in anything I do. Let only them criticize that can do DO BETTER! Thank you for your comment.
Yes
How about Mitch McConnell & some of the republican cohorts also.
About the craftiest, most evil reptile you'll ever come across, even in his ancient status. Looks like a tortoise & will probably last as long.
That’s so funny and so true! Who he is well depicted!
Thank you Charles! He has poor leadership skills demonstrated early by his lack of even being able to SEE the need of the populace.
Oh, but he knows very well the desires of the corporate billionaires that pay him, & serves them well.
100% agree Grassley McConnell etc
corporations phase out their employees at 65-70 to make way for younger people why not do the same in the Congress?
The only reason Corps retire people @ 65 or earlier is bec they want to trade them in for younger people they can pay less money to get the same job done!
that is so true
Don't get old Judy. You don't have what it takes to do it right.
To be fair: NO ONE wanted ole Biden to run in 2020 ANYWAY! He has always been an ineffective, milquetoast candidate that everyone liked solely because he ruffled no feathers. My wish is for a TRUE PROGRESSive to run and win, dear Professor Reich. Maybe Katie Porter???
To put it quite bluntly, he was shoved down the voters throats by the democratic machine. The wheeling and dealing behind the scenes was beyond belief. He was probably a solid 3 or 4 on the list of choices and Kamala was maybe a 5. There were many better choices available but the party knew it could control both of them. A progressive terrifies them because real change might be the end of most of their sources of cash or at least they would have to tell where it comes from. Real change will never come out of that party. I was a life long dem until the last two elections. Now I want a young Bernie Sanders or even would prefer him to the other options we get forced down our throats. But I am very old and cynical.
I favor Gavin Newsom, if he can get his California healthcare system sorted out. He's the right age, charismatic, and is fairly progressive.
When he hoisted the flag of universal healthcare in California, he was vigorously opposed by the medical industry, so he backed down. I think the correct approach is not universal healthcare, but rather CalCare for all who want it. Maybe this could be translated into a federal context.
Newsom has been astonishing lately! Have you been following him? He’s taken on DeSantis and has been really assertive in a progressive way. I’m shocked because he’s always been a centrist nonentity but he finally seems to have gotten the memo. I’m very hopeful. (And he does have great hair.)
I vote in California. He is ambitious. He avoided being recalled because voters did not want a Republican replacement. He still emails for donations. I question his judgment because he was married to Kimberly Guilfoyle.
😳 “He was married to Kimberly Guilfoyle.” Gulp.
You have a great point, Carol.
Newsom strikes me as the very kind of wealthy Democrat who infuriates the working class. Both California and New York are more forgiving of wealth, maybe because they have so much of it, but I don't think Newsom plays well in the Midwest or Mountain West.
I agree. I think there is a reservoir of resentment against “coastal elites.” Newsom gave many Covid news conferences which I thought weren’t as good as those of disgraced New York governor what’s-his-name. Schools were kept closed a long time in CA, which could be used against him in parts of the country which unlocked sooner.
People actually do change
True. If a person works to change for the better, they will change.
Yes, me too. However I do think he’s sounding much better. Time will vet him.
And took some pretty goofy photos with her. Don’t think he’s his own man. But there are slim pickings
Geez. I hope nobody holds me to task because of the $@#% I married.
Everyone makes mistakes. But Guilfoyle? Yikes. However, I know nothing about her prior to her outspoken trumpism.
I also like his joint video with the Washington (Jay Inslee) & Oregon (Kate Brown) governors saying those states will be safe havens for women needing abortion.
I hadn’t heard about that but more kudos!
I hope you get a chance to view it. I think it's on YouTube, but I'm not absolutely sure.
I’ve thought of Newsom too. The common (and often well deserved) trope about Democrats, held by those on the Right is that Dems are weak, wimpy, timid, afraid to take bold, aggressive action - especially without permission from their opponents (euphemistically called “bipartisanship”). Trump on the other hand, had no redeeming feature other than his willingness to be an a$$hole. That seemed to be enough for a surprising number of voters.
Not that it is the ONLY feature, but at this point, the Democrats really need someone who is also somewhat of a shark. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of anyone on the Left other than Newsom who might fit the bill.
That is how universal healthcare came to Canada; it started in Saskatchewan.
right on, and it should've started in the State California, who had an 80 billion dollars surplus to the budget, but hey, our governot was "taken care of" bythe "healthcare for profit" industry lobbyists, and out the window flew our universal healthcare in the State of California.
I hear your frustration and largely agree with it. But it's difficult to go up against the entire health industry in one giant leap. I think it's second only to the financial industry with regard to lobbyists and money behind it. I'm going to take a wait-and-see approach. His insulin iniative looks pretty good.
Steve, glad the insulin initiative looks good, but this is more than that. It's about becoming a model for the whole USA...Obamacare was OK-ish, but I don't wish to you to be hospitalized, even for a night, on it :-(...Obama was opposed in implementing the single payer by that schmuck Lieberman, which would've been the 60th vote, but it's been more than 10 years since, and it's time for the new steps towards universal healthcare. We're the only civilized country in the world where the health is tied to the job. Time to move on, right Gavin Newsom? :-)
I do like Newsome to run. Then, I will gladly vote for him.
There are very few Dems on the national stage who could stand up to Ron De Santis, who - I hate to say it - is good-looking, appealing and charismatic, besides being so evil he's called De Satan in Florida. We need Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama-style charisma in our next Democratic President.
Good looking? Ron De Santis?
Lucy, you're probably right. He's just 'pleasant looking' if you don't see the blood dripping from his fangs.
he has a bandit face...how could you find that 'pleasant looking'? :-)
He looks like Margery Taylor Green. They both appear to have Neanderthal DNA. Seriously.
I believe Old Joe should actually relax for his remaining years & enjoy life with Jill & his grandkids! Seems like this country has taken a lot out of him already in just 2 years! He says he will run but I really wish he would ask Obama to take the reins again especially if the Dems can win a larger majority in the Senate & House. As bad as I’d love to see a woman run for President, I just don’t think this Country is ready for it even though there are very many completely qualified! I also would like to see some much younger Senators & Reps in Congress try their hands & governing! I also think Gavin Newsom, Pete Buttigieg, or even our Gov Andy Beshear of KY would make excellent Presidential material. I hope nobody ever goes looking to CEOs for Presidential material. They simply don’t understand the workings of government or Congress but how could they when they’re only experienced in cut-throat Capitalism!
he was vigorously bribed by the medical industry and, like majority of US politicians, he got the bribe...we don't need presidential prospects that a bribable:-(
How do you know that? it's just your claiming. He's done a lot of good things.
I was referring strictly to the single payer in California that he campaigned on....please try to find independent sources for your information, not just what cable news feeds you on a daily basis:-)
I have witnessed what he has done through the years from when he was a mayor till now. He has always been courageous in the midst of spineless politicians. Do not accuse people who do not agree with your opinion.
Me too on old and cynical and discouraged with dems although there are heroes. Fetterman and Katie Porter.
If I was asked to list ppl who are national treasures, KP would be at (or very near) the top
You need to understand the difference between a democratic election (small d) and the Democratic Party (Big D). They are not in the business of giving money to Independent candidates.
what's wrong with AOC, then?
She’s perfect, but needs a bit more time staying on the right track to win. She is PERFECT, though. Did you see her on Colbert referring to past history? Girls a super star!
She was delightful on Colbert. She has become more polished and more articulate. And her smile could melt an ice berg. I don't think she's presidential timbre, YET, however. She's shows promise.
I like her a lot and I saw her on Colbert, but that thing of staying on the right track to win is not good, how long? people are fed-up with the status-quo proposed by the Dems, and on the other side we're talking about fascism and people like that Mussolini of Florida :-(
I think it would be wonderful for her to run, but she’s a ‘she’, intelligent, hispanic, young, beautiful, and relatively new to a hostile arena - the DNC would never allow it - they’re be scared to death of her power!
She is definitely one of the best. Nothing wrong with her!
You voted for trump over Biden???
Ain’t bein’ old grand? The DNC are whomps and money driven!
Much better said than my feeble attempt. Thank you.
I see you've bought into the "it's all rigged" narrative when things don't go your way.
Just because we're paranoid doesn't make it not true.
When the campaign committees "primary" progressive incumbents, and they have, the leadership of the party is too out of touch with what I always thought of as the Democrat's raison d'etre since about the time of FDR. I'm almost 81 and I wouldn't try to be president, but I'd vote for "old" Bernie tomorrow over many others. Newsom has attracted my notice, as well.
Exactly my thoughts.
Linda, Melissa. "I was a life long dem until the last two elections."
By necessary implication you supported Trump.
I voted for Hilary and for Biden. To make that jump shows a certain level ignorance. I wanted Bernie but I got stuck with the dem choices. Both a couple of duds in my opinion.
The people who voted for minority candidates validate the assumption.
If you aren't a Democrat, in this discussion, you are the "other."
I was probably a dem before you were even born. But the party I saw had the guts to fight for poor, the middle class and labor. Where are they now? Why sucking up to the rich and begging for money just like the Rs. Not to mention the fact they have lost what little fight they had in them. They are a long way from the Kennedys. If FDR was still alive he would be horrified at what they have become. If you can't see or understand than you are no better than the right and just a party robot.
You incorrect in this assumption. There were a lot of people who voted for either the Johnson/Weld or the Jill Stein ticket in the 2016 When Trump one - Jill Stein lead the charge for a recount in several mid-west "swing states." This was an attempt on her part to absolve herself from any culpability for Trump's win. But she will never escape the fact that she was accessory to this tragedy. Had the votes these two other contenders siphoned off gone to Hillary - the course of American history would have been very different. Most likely the reason you fail to remember this is that those who voted for these "third party candidates" keep this a DEEP secret. Yes, they are responsible for Trump. Make sure, if you them - to remind them of this FACT.
Stein voters elected Trump.
Hillary led with the popular vote! Get rid of the Electoral College!
aha, so in no way it was Hillary's fault or the DNC?
No it certainly was not but it was the fault of the Electoral College, a useless leftover from the early days of our country’s history! The National Popular Vote should be how we elect our Presidents so we don’t end up with another Bush or tRump. Those 2 have done enough damage to last more than a lifetime! We must have majority rule & a functional Congress to move us forward! There are so many problems to deal with here & around the World that we can no longer afford to be stalled by a dysfunctional Congress. Hopefully some folks have finally learned that u cannot protest the choices we are dealt in each party by not voting or throwing ur vote away with a third party candidate! That’s how we end up with jerks like tRump! So if Biden is our choice instead of a younger more dynamic person, we should support him wholeheartedly & give him the majorities in Congress so he can get something of his agenda accomplished! Do you all remember back in the dark ages after Nixon’s fiasco when Gerald Ford took over? He said that he believed a woman would be made President after the death of the elected President because the American people just don’t believe a woman could be elected on her own merits & skills! That could easily happen at any time.
Now is not the time for infighting among Democrats. Mistakes were made, hopefully we and the DNC have all learned and we go forward UNITED because right now the stakes are simply too great for to seek what we believe, in our own opinion, to be the "perfect" candidate - if that is not a candidate who gives us ALL the best chance to keep the GOP out of the Oval Office. We all need to focus on the GREATER GOOD.
She, like myself, cut our ties to the Democratic party. Doesn't mean we voted for a Republican. Never have, never will. But we're looking for a new home......
have you heard of the Green Party?
Jill Stein kinda spoiled any chance the Green Party has for the next several generations when she sat down for dinner with Putin.
They in effect supported Trump.
What they should have done is offer to join with the Democrats. Bargained for position.
Actually, the wisest thing to do after Bernie was denied the Democratic nomination, was for Bernie to accept the Green Party's offer to lead their ticket, make a secret pact with the Democratic leadership & Clinton campaign for both Bernie & Hillary to concentrate their attacks on Trump, continuing to espouse their respective policies, & then 2 or 3 weeks before Election Day, whoever was behind between the 2 withdraw & support the other.
why didn't the dems made them that offer, or do you think that everybody's like the progressives, led by Pramila Jaypal who immmediately folds at the slightest pressure put on her?
Nonsense.
I'm sick of ageism. If NO ONE wanted him to run, how did he get nominated and elected? What you mean by "no one" is no one you like. Tell that to the black women who put him over the top.
I like Joe Biden and I think he's doing a great job despite all opposition -- from without and within. He, Nelllie and I have an expiration date. I'm 78. Spend more time with medical providers than with my family. IMHO Biden is a miracle medical marvel.
I like Democratic senators but rather would not want to lose a senate seat.
I want a clean candidate. But I supported people like Johnboy Edwards only to find that he had a secret. Same for Clinton.
I think the DNC should administer IQ tests, MMPIs and lie detector tests to the array of candidates in the 2024 elections. Pick ones with the most gravitas and those who literally pass the test.
Challenge Republicans with the test results.
I fully agree! I think, if "Moscowmitch" were disposed, Biden would presently be PASSING maybe 30-60% of what Bernie Sanders had planned. He has been FORCED to the left because of all the issues facing us. If he were 20 years younger, I really wouldn't mind voting for him in 2024 honestly.
Does anyone think even a genius younger candidate would fare well with the filibuster, hostile obstructionist Republicans gerrymandering and even the Electoral College which severely limits our attempts at Democracy?
Maybe not, BUT bringing everything out in the open factually and fighting instead of hoping to reach hands across the table might at least start to turn things around.
Tried to heart Jan.
Sunshine as disinfectant.
I am good with bringing everything out in the open factually and fighting. I think that is .what is happening now with the Jan 6th committee. It would be truly great if we could bein to begin to correct these flaws in our rules.
Moscow Mitch gave us the answer to deposing him & his ultra conservative attitudes. He said he would retire if he didn’t get to be Majority Leader in ‘24 so we just have to make that happen! Working to elect 2-4 more Dem Senators would give Biden more power! We need Charles Booker here in KY, Val Demings in FL, Mandela Barnes in WI, Tim Ryan in OH, MJ Hegar in TX, Dr Agbede in CA, & every other Dem candidate who’s running must be elected in Nov! I believe if tRump is indicted before the elections, the wind would be taken out of the sails of any GOP trumpers who will be running! That Party has to be reformatted & be rid of all criminals & unethical types!
Shirley Roberts ; well said!
Daniel, I love the idea of IQ tests, even though they only measure the ability of how well you test. But along with knowledge of the Constitution, the three branches of Government and the responsibilities of each it would be a good idea. As for lie detectors, a psychopath like trump could pass with flying colors because they honestly believe the lies that come out of their mouths are the truth.
Oh, I had forgotten about the potential loss of a Senator, but maybe by then it won’t be a danger.
Good luck with that! (Challenging Republicans with lie detectors or any other tests).
Shakespeare: The play's the thing.....
But first WE need clean candidates.
Daniel Solomon ; Ah! but there's the rub!
you're kidding, right? ...about the tests, I mean.
I can't get behind your stated POV
Actually I'm serious. I would VOLUNTARILY be tested if I were a politician. Open up my track record for all to see.
I was not a politician, but I did live in a fishbowl. I was tested, evaluated prior to hire by the federal government, had to pass background checks.
Here's an example. Trump wanted to appoint his own people so he killed it. https://www.opm.gov/services-for-agencies/administrative-law-judges/
https://careers.state.gov/career-paths/worldwide-foreign-service/officer/fso-test-information-and-selection-process/#:~:text=The%20Foreign%20Service%20Officer%20Test,about%20three%20hours%20to%20complete.
I don't need links, thank you very much. It makes me sad that you lived in a fishbowl but that and the other facts you share seem to explain your POV.
I just can't share it.
I also once represented defendants in criminal cases. Best way to beat the charge: offer to take a lie detector test.
The point is that we need honest candidates. I'd like to see Trump's MMPI.
That said, I agree we need someone who can be there for 8 years. (And one more thing: there are plenty of young fascists.)
Good point. Being young may make a person physically stronger but doesn’t confer compassion or wisdom, and certainly not common sense.
I'm on the fence. I agree with your stance against ageism, but there is a significant mental decline in most, if not all after 80. Joe's a great guy, but we need someone who can get out in front of- or at least abreast of- all the BS going down. The only one I see that might do it is Newsom, but our best candidates always emerge during the primaries.
I agree. It's the stupid, prejudiced slagging I can't stand. It does NO ONE any good, just tears apart from the inside.
Let's hear it for our sisters! I am loving the thought of Stacy Abrams as governor for now and then as our first? female president.
Stacy would be awesome.
Perhaps I mispoke? What I meant was that he won ONLY because _rump was so DESPISED. Kind of like: "would you prefer horrific, gut-wrenching diarrhea or getting your left arm chopped off?" Biden was the sonic diarrhea by the way, and I would take that ANY DAY over losing an arm.
Oh! And the only reason he ran at all was because the DINOs were "a-scared" of Bernie Sanders so they screwed him.
Hmmmm, that may also mean they were afraid of all of us who wanted Bernie.
The DNC seems to prove that repeatedly. They only like Bernie for his votes against the Repubs.
Damn. I wish Bernie supporters of your ilk, because I support Bernie too, would keep your metaphors to yourself. And when are you guys going to learn to channel your anger creatively?! I'm really frustrated and tired of your hateful rhetoric
We Bernie supporters have watched the very undemocratic DNC do everything in their power to keep progressives out, including the DNC support of anti-abortion criminal Henry Cuellar against Jessica Cisneros. The DNC went hard after Nina Turner, who is a great voice for the base. The DNC needs to keep their filthy corporate money out of primaries. Then Biden does stuff like consorting with Mitch McConnell to nominate an anti-abortion judge. I think we're allowed to be angry. Angry rhetoric vs. anti-democratic, anti-progressive DNC actions? The DNC deserves the rhetoric.
Grrrrr. That is inexcusable. I don’t have answers, but no Democrat should work with Moscow Mitch, who blocked Obama’s judicial choices.
I personally withhold my rhetoric but I donate exclusively to progressives like Bernie, Justice Democrats, WFP …
Well put, Jim. I strongly agree with Barbara, but I too tend to withhold my rhetoric.
Barbara -- thank you.
Of course you're "allowed" to be angry! You don't need permission for feeling your feelings!
I can't stay in that place. I have to MOVE! in a direction that feels like it will not only express my outrage but MOVE me toward an outcome, hopefully a resolution of some sort.
You need to understand the difference between democrat with a small "d" and a Big "D", as in the National Democratic Committee. The DNC is not in the business of supporting the candidacy of candidates who register as Independent. It might have gotten him elected in Vermont, but it won't work on a Federal level. Simple fact.
Bernie is not and has never been a Democrat. I'm not sure why you expect the DNC to support a candidate who has not supported the party and in fact has held himself separate from the party. Isn't that kind of like your neighbor coming over to ask to use your ATM card because he never thought he'd need one?
The DNC is pumping corporate PAC money into Democratic primaries where a corporate incumbent is being challenged by a progressive Democrat. This is true of Cuellar vs. Cisneros and also with Nina Turner and other progressive Democrats. The DNC is telling progressives they are separate and don't belong by DNC actions during primaries. But then the DNC expects progressives to come out in large numbers in the general election, and blames progressives when they don't. Loyalty is a one way street in the DNC.
oh please! pomposity contributes nothing to the discourse.
Ditto
🤣🤣🤣 this is sending me! Completely agree, most voters chose between Schrump or other and obviously other was the better option. I might’ve just said the lesser of two evils but go off 🗣
NellieH ; I agree!
When Biden announced his candidacy, he made statements to the effect of the GOP would have an "epiphany" after Trump left and return to being a party that he, Joe Biden, could work with. To be blunt, I thought he was delusional -- out of touch with the reality of the situation.
I hoped that time would have proven me wrong. The Democrats desperately need fresh leadership.
The GOP coup is the problem. Not Joe Biden.
There are a MULTITUDE of problems. The coup and Joe Biden's weak leadership are but TWO of them.
Biden came in on the heels of the first Black President and the threat of the first White Female President. He came into office with a one vote majority in the Senate. His ability to get the Infrastructure Act- a huge piece of bipartisan legislation passed is not a sign of weakness. Washington was constipated long before Biden's election. If you want to blame someone, let's talk about Newt Gingrich and his Contract with America, the Federalist Society, and Reagan's unholy menage a trois of conservative media, politics, and televangelism.
And ??
Fox News, MTG, the Court, etc. etc.
Age doesn't limit naivety.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/07/how-democrats-failed-to-respond-to-the-supreme-court-what-they-need-to-do-now?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=vf&utm_mailing=VF_CH_070522&utm_medium=email&bxid=5bdcd0e52ddf9c58d0f3e578&cndid=29142082&hasha=f55028361f41834062a36d39a9503760&hashb=b301b38cd03606ed99a899d225bdd6459efd4980&hashc=235b3a501f2ecb68ae3676377e90a470a7f4218f046df64ba8e98499a1d65492&esrc=bounceX&source=EDT_VYF_NEWSLETTER_0_COCKTAIL_HOUR_ZZ&utm_campaign=VF_CH_070522&utm_term=VYF_Cocktail_Hour&fbclid=IwAR0gbm2V4tP_stSxeOS8yH-HQjpdFZ3QhD-UhSqvAEur6qCy-Bk_uOMnPIg
Lets hear it for Katie!!!
That is NoT true. Biden was 29 when he went to Congress,/ a time when compromise between parties was possible. He felt he could restore reason to Congress after the caustic years of
McConnell swearing that Obama would achieve nothing followed by the nightmare of Donald Trump. Biden can’t do anything more than Obama who has a 50-50 Senate (actually 48-50 with Manchin and Sinema). Give Biden a break. He’s old- yes- but he’s a good man. Trump is 73 or older and he’s a horrible human being.
Thank you, Luana.
Trump is 76.
Congress is 25 years old, the Senate is 30, and the Presidency is 35, as per the Constitution.
Just to go on the record, I for one, DIDN’T like Biden at all, but I did vote for him. Tired of voting for the lesser of two evils.
Just what is evil about Joe Biden?? U r maybe jealous of his age & ability to still get important things done. The only evil Party was tRump & his Rethugs who are still causing a surprising amount of trouble! I wouldn’t bad mouth Biden because he’s done a marvelous job getting Covid under somewhat control if only he could mandate vaccinations for everyone, we would be in a much better state of control. CDC just released new stats about Omicron sub variants that are causing 80% of the 100,000 new infections that have been occurring across the country the past 2 weeks!! Just imagine for a minute the shape we would be in if the Orange Guy was still in charge!! Then there’s the fine line he’s been walking trying to help Ukraine beat off the Russians without starting a nuclear war with Russia. I believe his sanctions have had a terrible effect on their economy Plus angered the Oligarchs by seizing their toys. He’s not behaving like a pushover but is also not a rabble rouser like TFG was. Everybody was sick of his loud mouth of empty words don’t U think?
In 2016, I liked Biden & was hoping he would run, mostly to dilute Hillary's support so that Bernie had a better chance, but also because I thought he would make a better president. By 2020, he was only around 10th on my list (about the same as Kamala). By now, I would vote for Clinton over Joe ( or Harris) because I think she better understands the danger the republofascists pose to our democracy, nation & future.
Well, neither is on the menu. Unless something dramatic changes, it's going to be either Biden or something Trumpy.
So you're going to run for office? I'm continually amazed by people who feel that voting is the full extent of their civic responsibility, yet feel completely comfortable attacking and criticizing those who DO commit to running for office. People have been dealing with and electing "the lesser of two or three evils" for millennia. When you're unwilling to run for office yourself but want to Monday Morning quarterback those who do, you're part of the problem instead of the solution.
Sure sounds like a holier than thou dig......with little sympathy for people that don't live up to your standards. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Hey- you're the one criticizing people not living up to your unpublished standards. There's nothing particularly judgy about expecting people to walk the walk if they talk the talk. That used to be a given. All I said was to put your action where your mouth is, so yeah, consider yourself corrected.
I agree with Terry. Many of us unwilling to run for office do NOT give up the right to criticize those who do. At least we don't unless this latest crew of Republican officials, Judges, and Justices complete their coup.
You don't have to run for office- you can be part of the election process- man the phone banks for your guy/gal. Build phone trees for voter registration and to remind people to get to the polls. Make arrangements for rides down to the polls. Elections are huge, dynamic events where there are many ways to support candidates of your choice.
At the end of the day, majority rules. If you're serious about protecting democracy, you do all you can to get your person in there but when they don't make the cut, you step up to the plate to keep the Republican from doing things like abolishing Roe v Wade and the EPA. Like it or not, we have a binary system. Stomping your feet and throwing a hissy fit by casting a "protest vote" doesn't do anything except silence your voice.
You need to understand the difference between your opinion and fact. You don't like Biden and try to project your beliefs on the whole of the Democratic party. There were and continue to be many Democrats who wanted him to run.
Katie Porter is great but she doesn’t have any momentum. The real problem is that anyone who wants the job isn’t qualified and those who are qualified won’t stoop to what it takes to run.
"The best lack all conviction while the worst are full of passionate intensity . . .and what rough beast . .?"
What about a Newsom/Porter ticket?
@Curt. Katie Porter still has to win her seat in the new CA47. I believe she will. Then she has two years to build momentum and a campaign. But I don't think she can lead the ticket over the top of folks like several governors and people like Cory Booker. I like Katie in Congress or as the VP candidate.
On what basis does anyone think a woman or a black man can win in 2024? I am asking for data, polls, solid evidence.
@Martha. Very good question. I have a preconception that they cannot, and this is based on observation of our politics over many years and many studies documenting the perverse voting habits of the American electorate. Still, my perceptions are not science. That said, choosing a candidate is partly an exercise in risk assessment - can my candidate win? I'd say that in our country a woman has the cards stacked against her in races for high executive responsibility, and that black people (male or female) face equally daunting odds against attracting just that little percentage of voters that create the majority, winning coalition. I'd say the risks are too high in 2024 for the Democrats to expend any little part of their potential-to-win on anything that is still a "social experiment" in our country or on any candidate who is testing the boundaries of acceptance by the electorate.
you got that right.
I declined to respond to this discussion's poll because it fails to include an "I have no frikkin' idea" option! (which is in no way the same as the "Too early to tell" option.)
An interesting screed speaking to this very question:
https://youtube.com/shorts/CG5K5qOFZL0?feature=share
Face it. Biden was elected by the people who set an "Anyone but "ol Tweety" sign in their front yard - which supports your view. Personally, I'm not convinced anyone could have done much better in the situation, but I'm thinkin' it's time for him to start taking stock of the public's response to him, and reassess whether he has a viable campaign path for '24.
I'm including the following because its a good comment on what we all, Biden specifically, will be contending with:
https://youtu.be/nG-mPHSDV8w
Check out my response above.
I want a candidate who can pass the test. If I were representing a candidate, I'd ask her to voluntarily take a lie detector test and threaten the opponents to do same.
you're nuts. Tell that little fascist up in your attic to take a nap!
Well, obviously the corporatist establishment that controls the Democratic Party wanted him to win. They came to his rescue at a crucial time when his campaign was falling apart & he was in the worst position out of 5 contenders, pulled him through South Carolina, got 2 of his main rivals to pull out, 1 of whom (Buttigieg) had up to that point had placed ahead of Biden overall through the first 4 primaries, which together comprised no more than 5% of the delegates so far, just ahead of the largest & most important primary day, Super Tuesday. Fishy? You bet!
Yes, I love Katie Porter. Also aside from Warren, I also like Merkley, Inslee & Whitehouse a lot. Others that should make good candidates are Booker, Beto, Buttigieg, Schiff & Lieu, Grijalva, Tlaib, Jayapal, AOC & maybe Pritzker (not sure I spelled it right, governor of Illinois). Newsom is making waves, too, although there are some problems with him.
I think Katie Porter is qualified and probably doesn’t have a lot of skeletons hanging in her closet. She knows how to hit ‘em where it hurts. She’s tenacious and doesn’t step down from a fight. Her head and heart are in the right place. She is real people.
I love Katie Porter, but she simply doesn't have the visibility or charisma to get elected- and it's a damn shame. She's awesome.
That being said, I have great hopes for AOC when she matures a bit more. It'll be a dozen years before she's even old enough to serve as President.
I think she'll be eligible by either the next presidential election or one after that.
There's a huge difference in being eligible and qualified. She has absolutely no foreign policy experience. It's one thing to criticize, quite another to govern. Give her another ten years and she'll be a force to be reckoned with.
AOC telling Dana Bash that she won't commit to supporting Biden in 2024, if he's the candidate, was bush-league (sorry for the word-choice, W...). Biden should invite her to the White House and give her an assignment to prove her maturity & commitment to advancing Democrats' success: Bait Tucker Carlson to invite her onto his show on a frequent basis, to present Democrats' ideas to viewers stuck in their silo. Call him out as a cowardly misogynist, homophobic, racist who's afraid to discuss ideas. Promise her that the Democratic party will reward her very well if she succeeds in keeping Democrats in charge of the House & increasing their Senate presence: perhaps Veep in 2024? [If the Dems maintain power in the midterms, Biden needs to ditch Kamala from the Veep office by sending her to SCOTUS!)
All good ideas. Personally, I would counsel her to take Gillibrand's Senate seat and build alliances. She's razor sharp, but like a lot of younger people has a tendency to slide down the hill before she finds out where the stickers are. Once she's in the Senate she may not want the Presidency nearly as badly- the Senate is an incredibly powerful institution. From the Senate you can wield power with a certain level of security. See, this is why I don't like the idea of term limits. I'm not willing to limit AOC's time in either Chamber. Experience is valuable, especially in a crisis.
and YOU"RE the arbiter of maturity, are you?
Being a good Legislator is one thing, but if you really want the power to make changes you need to know how to move legislation. I love AOC for changing the narrative and keeping a progressive agenda front and center. History informs us that an astonishing few have the political sophistication necessary to build the consensus necessary to pass big legislation in a democratic society. So far she's become very visible and is incredibly eloquent, but hasn't actually been part of any bills that have been made into law. Besides, the Constitution says you have to be at least 35 years old to hold the Office of the Presidency. AOC is 32. Kennedy was our youngest President thus far at 42. She has time to get some seasoning before she runs. I can't wait!
This is more like it. When you stick to stating the facts and leave off being judgmental and defensive, I appreciate your comments. Thank you.
32 now, but how old will she be by inauguration 2025? I think I read somewhere that she would be 35 by then.
She simply isn't ready and doesn't have the support necessary to win. It was be tragic to waste such talent by putting her in a situation that she can't succeed, then she loses her House seat. Most Americans aren't ready to put the future of the free world in the hands of a 35 year old with four years experience as an elected official.
Political maturity. Are you capable of engaging in a dialogue without dragging you personal baggage along?
um, yeah. Are YOU?
The Democratic National Committee IS A CORPORATION DEDICATED TO ELECTING DEMOCRATS TO ELECTIVE OFFICE. They have every right to promote whatever candidates they choose to the nomination. Why don't you understand this? Biden paid in five decades of service to the party, and he was much more popular with voters than Buttigieg, Warren, Booker, Beto, and ESPECIALLY Inslee. Tlaib and Jayapal are far too radical for Federal Office- I'd be surprised if either survive midterms. You just gave a list of great democratic Congressmen and Senators, but nobody who has a broad enough appeal to win a national election.
Upon reflection, you can include the whole Democratic party that is continually maligned by its own. Who else would we support? The wank-publicans? Certainly not the >real< Socialists, who in the first place back Putin in Ukraine, blaming the whole business on NATO imperialism on behalf of the US. On that issue, the wank-publicans sound >exactly like< real Socialists. And just to be clear, by the standard I've become passingly familiar with, Bernie is >nowhere near< being such a Socialist.
I don't think you have a grasp on the different political theories. Putin is part of an oligarchy, which is far from socialism. Bernie is a Democratic Socialist, which basically only means your focus is on society rather than capitalism- but they work well together, like in Scandinavia or Canada.
It has nothing to do with my grasp of theories. I'm aware of what you're saying. What I'm saying is that the Socialist newsletter I get considers the US and NATO the aggressor in Ukraine, and they don't even recognize Bernie as even an ally, let alone a Socialist. Perhaps you'd like to see what they have to say about things for yourself. I encourage it: https://www.wsws.org/en It's good to know what true Socialists have to say about things, for when the wank-publicans start their tired-assed bullshit dance about Democrats being Socialists. Anyone who buys that garbage are the ones who don't grasp the political theories. - and that's >exactly< what the wank-publicans prey on. You can sign up for a newsletter at that site. I highly recommend you subscribe to grasp what I'm trying to say.
Democratic Socialist countries include England, Italy, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Portugal, Greece, Ireland, Scotland, Brazil, Ecuador, and Peru- among others.
The Nazis called themselves socialists as well, but they weren't. What you've found are Trotskyites, which is a very early form of communism. It's a kind of socialism, but a very archaic and with very limited following. That website is seriously wonky, as well.
It actually please me to see >someone< speaking up for Biden here, for a change. Like I said in my comment, I didn't vote in the poll because I don't have a clue whether Biden should run again. I've heard so much from our own railing against what he has or hasn't done, yet I can't realistically believe >anyone< could have done any better, or even as well with the situation he inherited. >I< certainly wouldn't want to be in his position, and as I said weeks ago in a similar discussion in this forum, I don't think >any< of his critics - here or elsewhere - could have possibly done a better job - or avoided wilting, or even managed to remain rational in the circumstance, for that matter.
I think Biden has made mistakes, but few Presidents have had to operate in such a dysfunctional society. There hasn't been an attempted insurrection since 1861, COVID, mass shootings, and extracted us from two twenty year undeclared, unbudgeted wars AS WELL AS passing the most powerful BIPARTISAN infrastructure legislation in 75 years. While Afghanistan was horrific to watch, it was the Afghan government that failed, not Biden or the USA. We gave enough blood and treasure to stabilize them. Remember, at the beginning of the war when they were discussing strategic targets someone said that bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age would actually be progress.
Great Presidents aren't born, they become great because of the difficulty and crises they face in office. Historians don't even consider analyzing events until at least 25 years go by. The next two years will tell the tale. We'll either have a stronger nation or will be in the process of watching our democracy disintegrate- but very little of it will be Biden's fault, or within his purview to actually affect. At this point- as my old man used to say- I think we should "dance with the one what brung ya."
Well, if he runs again, >I'll< certainly vote for him. I like your take on Afghanistan. I'm surprised you didn't include that Biden was only following up on the agreement and planning ol' Tweety had already brokered and planned. If the pull-out is to be considered a failure, the blame should fall squarely on ol' Tweety for arranging it all, although Biden didn't have to go along with it. Of course, Biden had lots of other fish to fry, if memory serves! Besides, he'd have likely taken criticism for waste, or something, for not using what was already arranged and set in place, had he done anything else.
Even if Tweety didn't arrange it it had to happen. We were pouring blood and treasure down a black hole with no possibility of success. We can't change culture or build nations. We've never had any luck at it whatsoever. We went in to Afghanistan to get Bin Laden. When we got him, we should have left then. It wouldn't have changed anything except the number of American service people killed and amount of profit the military industrial complex posted for their shareholders. As unfortunate as the situation was and is, the Afghan people need to build their own nation on their own terms. We need to stop trying to Americanize the world.
Y'know, your comment here raises a question in my mind about who wanted Biden to win the nomination, in the first place. I know there's a push in Illinois in a primary to have a candidate win in the primary that the opposition thinks can be easily beaten in the general election. I'm not sayin' that's what happened with Biden, but it would >surely< have been an unpleasant surprise to ol' Tweety & the gang, particularly if ol' Tweety's supporters were trying to set up an easy win for ol' Tweety. Just a'conjurin' up a notion, here.
Biden has been a fixture in the Democratic Party since the 70s. He has more support in the party than anyone he ran against.
Nonsense.
Oh, & maybe Dr.Reich himself. In any case, the Democratic Party should utilize his expert ability to see our problems, analyze them & come up with solutions, explaining them in a clear, concise way, with the help of his sketches, to make it easy for the public to understand.
NO ONE? That is a bold statement. Do you know EVERYONE?
He knows everyone that matters.
Daniel Laemmerhirt knows everyone that matters? I guess I don’t matter, because I have never heard of him before. I am sure he’s never heard of me.
An interesting possibility, I think. She's solid.
On what basis do you think that a woman can be elected in 2024?
Is there a basis that a woman cannot be elected?
I don't think it's about being a woman so much as being the right woman for our times. I had hopes for Harris, but something happened. Whether it's her fault or Biden's, she's not well-regarded. AOC often speaks for me, but she raises too many red flags for a lot of Democrats. Porter comes across as practical, hard working and super-smart.
fault? It is somebody's fault that the vp has disappointed you? Why do you have to assign blame? I'm sorry, I find the discourse here more than a little arrogant and preachy. yuck.
Sorry if that was offensive. I am more curious than anything else. Washington is a very male-centered town, and this is our first female vice president.
s'ok
One more time. On what basis do you think - what is the data you have in hand - that allows you to think that any woman or any black man can be elected in 2024?
No data here, but I think there are always outiers.
Once again. Evidence, please. Outliers is not a policy choice, is it?
You’re right! So my question is: Why was he pushed on us by the DNC?
The DNC has, IMO, a perception of the world whereby the Clinton and Obama years were glorious*. People tend to be fearful of change until things become so awful that there's no other alternative. The DNC is not there yet -- much to our peril.
*Glorious -- despite their being a continuation of neoliberal Reaganomics. "How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the Neutron Bomb of Free Trade."
As candidates have come to rely on huge unlimited donations from wealthy donors in both party's, Neoliberal Wall-Street Democrats just keep clawing there way back to get the nomination like zombies in a horror movie. The DNC has lost all control over candidates in office or Manchin and Sinema would not be able to block Biden at every turn. Dirty coal money and states rights Joe Manchin deciding energy policy is such an obvious conflict of interest that the DNC should easily be able to put him in a box and make him come into line. They are worthless.
So you're voting for Trump? I'm always amused by how people find all these $20 words to throw around in criticizing a political process almost 250 years in the making, yet offer few- if any solutions. For every finger voters point at your "neo-liberal Wall Street Democrats" three fingers point back.
You really need to quit throwing that trope at anyone who disagrees with you.....who knows, you could just get blocked?
He / she has got that "Neera Tanden" quality going for them.
I've got three fingers pointing back at a paid subscription.
Absolutely. The DNC's average age seems like a bunch of old people who's memory isn't very good. They're no longer leading. Time to get out of the way. Old people don't always know better.
Obama passed the ACA. That's monumental, regardless of whether you recognize it or not. Biden passed the Infrastructure Act, which will be nearly as beneficial to Americans. Tell me, WTF did Bush or Trump do?
I honestly believe that Biden was the candidate that Trump wanted to oppose. Thought he had a lot of dirt on him. The primary election polls showed that Trump would have been trounced by other candidates.
That said, thank goodness that Biden won.
Of course, the primary election polls also showed that Clinton was going to win by a landslide. I've never been overly enamoured with statisticians.
Bush and Trump both set the US back in time. Of course that's what they were supposed to do.
Every Republican President since Lincoln- including Teddy Roosevelt and especially Eisenhower- set the nation back. TR's was much more insidious- but we probably would never have seen an ascendant militant Japan had he not encouraged them to develop their own version of the Monroe Doctrine in Asia. They took it to heart.
Paybacks?
If you mean Bernie, it's because he is not and has never been a Democrat. He should have run as an independent, but he knew there were obstacles if he tried to join the party just to get elected.
Biden has been a fixture in DNC politics for four decades. Remember, the job of the DNC isn't to find the best candidate, but to find the most electable party faithful. They have their own mandate, and it's unlikely that an AOC or other new face, regardless of how impressive, will shoot past someone who has raised millions of campaign dollars for the party.
I believe you nailed it....'a fixture in DNC politics for four decades". Sounds less like an accolade and more like a problem, especially if one is a Millennial or a Zoomer.
The funny part is that Millennials and Zoomers will absolutely believe in it when they've been in the business for four decades. Meritocracy has its merits. Nobody wants to spend a lifetime working towards a goal and contributing to a greater community only to have some upstart snot nose who thinks their eighteen times around the planet has provide absolute and empirical truths. Everyone thinks they have a new approach, new ideas, new processes- but it's a rare bird that actually does. Very little new under the sun- it's just that the snot nosed have all the answers before they learned all the questions.
So sad that the vote has been taken from us.
She'd be great.
So on what basis do you think that in 2024 it is possible to elect a woman ?
I guess if you're going to go hammering on about 'data', then you should share with the rest of us the data that supports the contrary. None of us are really expert pollsters here. We're just going by what we've seen and read and to some degree our hopes. Enlighten us please.
1. Please do not throw shade with the patronizing phrase "hammering on." We are all volunteers here, and there is nothing in my contract that requires me to tolerate time wasting and rude address.
2. If you are here, it's reasonable to expect that you are willing and eager to go to the polls and read them. Here are some of the polls with which we would all do well to be informed. fivethirtyeight.com. realclearpolitics.com. cookpolitical.com. pewresearch.org. https://gelliottmorris.substack.com/ - Democracy By The Numbers.
Not quite sure where you're coming from but it seems you are perhaps a bit too tense? I am not a volunteer here....not sure how paying for a newsletter qualifies. I came here for information not to trade insults. But thanks for the links. PS, 'hammering on' is not an insult or patronizing, its simply a way of saying your responses are perhaps a bit too demanding??
If you are not a volunteer here, then you are being paid? If you think these demands are too demanding, you may find the information I provided in response to your question for data sources a bit of a slog. For which, of course, you can thank me, and you are welcome. Nevertheless, this isn't astrophysics. It's necessary to clearly seeing the situation in which we live and the consequences we are facing if we fail to grasp the situation.
Enlightened now?
How could I be? Not trying to pick a fight here, but that's the snottiest remark I've read in the last 2 days......worthy of a 7 year old.
Well, it was written to an audience with the mind of a seven year old.
First off Biden has to offer to step down. The worst thing we could do right now would be to primary a sitting President and polarize what little unity the left has. If he indeed encourages a primary and a dynamic, electable woman comes forward, I'll vote for her. It won't be VP Harris, for better or worse. Biden would do better than she in 2024. Right now there isn't anyone who has the X factor to win the Presidency over the incumbent.
On what basis do you see data indicating that any woman or black man is electable as president of the United States in 2024?
On what basis do you keep demanding that folks supply you with "data"?
Give it up, already!
@Hyla. It is a rhetorical question; I won't speak for Martha, but I don't need more data because there is plenty of data showing the up hill battle that candidates of color and women face in politics. If you think someone can win, what do you base that opinion upon?
It's absolutely reasonable to expect people to back up their assertions with facts. If you can't supply the facts, you know what they say about opinions.
If you don't want to rely on data, on what do you want to rely?
More like ....not the conversation to have now! Focus on winning in NOV.
I also agree that winning in November is going to focus the direction for the remaining 2 years of the Biden presidency. Get out the vote people, your life depends upon it. Think of what would happen if the GOP regained power? We'd become an autocratic society of aggressive men telling women and minorities what to do, no environmental or climate protections and democracy would be a thing of the past.
Amen. Register more Democrats.
Contact Mervis Reissig
merv4peace@gmail.com
https://www.fieldteam6.org/
Agree, we need to pull together. We need to win in November.
Biden isn’t tough enough snd has his head in the sand. The MoscowMitch judge deal is insane. Kavanaugh impeachment proceedings should have been done right after his inauguration. Ditch the damn filibuster, we know the GQP will if they regain power
We need to confront the republicans. Gavin Newsom seems willing by taking on desantis. Blast de Wine over the raped 10 year old. Call republicans sick and disgusting. Vote Vets is going after Walker in Georgia. Texas tattletale squealer snitch stool pigeon plan is a copy of the old East German Stasi spy system.
first of all, I love the question about Biden, and I don't agree that we should wait for the midterms to discuss. Rs and SCOTUS are doing damage NOW. I'm in no position to be age-ist (I'm 66) but I agree that Biden should NOT run again. I agree with you that it's as much about style as age. He wants to unify but you cannot work with Mitch M and crew. they are NOT reasonable people. We need a fighter , someone who will take the case big-time to the country. sorry, it's not Bernie or E Warren. they cannot get the country behind them. I'm from Ohio. I also like Sherrod Brown but you'e got to WANT to be POTUS to do the job. Not sure he wants it. I like Gavin N a lot - also like all that I figure all the dirt on him is already out (at least I think). I can get behind Kamala but not sure she can win. My prediction is that it will be Gavin versus DeSantis in 2024. I do think Liz C and Jan 6th committee are doing real damage to Trump, THANK GOD. in any event, we need SCOTUS reform ASAP
If we wait we’re roadkill. Immediate steps need to be taken to counteract current damage. Talk of possible 2024 candidates could invigorate Dem enthusiasm. The Dem Party machinery is corrupt and stagnant.
Great Klatsh, Robert and Heather! I was dead last on the poll, because I believe it would be better to keep the administration and President we already have. Look at how refreshing it has been to observe the Jan 6th investigation's work! We have not seen this kind of satisfying expose of wrongdoing in a long time. One of our oldest leaders; Nancy Pelosi was responsible for keeping the obstructionists off the committee and allowing it to work! The dignity and diversity and the professional work is so nice to see and hear. Biden has made a stab at righting some of the wrongs done to our women. It's a start. He is so much better than anyone on the other side. He should use his executive power to keep our Constitutional right to vote! I see a shrill minority who want Autocracy / tyranny. Not the majority. The votes for any Federal election should be secured. If it is sullied by gerrymandering and the Electoral College we will lose our freedom. Changing presidents will not prevent that if votes are taken away from voters.
I agree with Ms. Blair and not because I'm a year older than Joe Biden. . Like many commenting here, I'm not for removing our great Democratic leaders just because of their calendar age, especially those still doing amazing jobs on a daily basis, like Biden and Pelosi. And we must always remember the alternative: Autocracy. But rather than fear mongering we need to message about the achievements of this thin majority and talk constantly about what we could do with a more robust majority after the midterms.
Powers to secure Federal elections and voter's rights to have their votes counted!
I would add that President Biden might consider taking away committee assignments (and using other means that might be possible), to send a strong message to those two Senators and others who are betraying our Democracy to the point that it is in peril!
Biden's low approval rating is unwarranted. His Administration has accomplished amazing things. But few Democrat campaign managers rally around him. They leave him floundering alone. They spend grassroots funds on fear mongering and focusing voters attention on Trump and MAGA Republicans, which depresses Democrat voters and energizes Trump's supporters. This is the sorry state of the Biden Administration's public face. You may not like Biden's moderate milquetoast style. You may wish for a more youthful energy. But is that reason enough to step back and allow Democrats to loose the congressional midterm elections?
George Sell ; Very good question!
If the answer to my question is "NO" then we better start supporting Joe Biden because his low approval rating is gonna tank us in November.
George Sell ; I wish there was a way to message All main stream media that consistently cite polls that are showing low low numbers. and tell them to stop lying. Ever since there was reporting early on in tRump's campaign that accused him of giving bribes to a polling site, I realized that money and corruption is his M.O. and believed it. My latest strategy is to contribute to Inequality Media Civics which has tech savvy young people on Tik Tok, Snapchat and Twitter getting the truth out about Republican Regressives moves against Democracy and the rule of law. If I can be educated, why not youth?
President Biden is a fine man and a comsumate statesman. However, his image, in this bizaare political cycle, is too soft and too "business as usual." Unfortunately voters seem to be enamored with star power. President Obama's gift of "presence" made people pay attention. His speeches commanded attention. Democrats need a candidate who has the ability to excite both Democrats and Independents.
Charles Herro ; President Obama's gift of "presence" made people pay attention. Obama made some serious mistakes with the bail out of the big banks with no attempt to help homeowners harmed by their gambling with people's money, let alone consequences in the form of penalties. He also supported trade agreements that left the working people behind. Democrats don't need a candidate who has the ability to excite Democrats and Independents who cannot deliver!
I absolutely agree Laurie, I was terribly disappointed that he listened to the Republican economists and accepted their erroneous statements that the banks were "too big to fail" They deserved to fail, and their entire Boards of Directors, including the CEO's should have been prosecuted for wholesale theft. They didn't deserve a penny of "welfare" they received, and it was welfare, unearned taxpayer dollars, which many spent on bonuses, lavish parties for their managers, and stock buy-backs at we, the tax-payers expense.
To say nothing about the big CEO bonuses and 'golden parachutes' we all read about!
We need to wait until after the midterms. There are some good ideas that Biden would support.
As you have admitted, if the DNC hadn't cheated, we'd be deep in Bernie's second term. Will the Dems wake up, or do they prefer to lose than allow real change? (We know the answer, they would rather lose.)
Mike Benson ; There is also the Corporate owned media that Bernie himself cautiously mentioned was not fair to him. Add the purging of votes and misinformation about voting dates and times, removal of polling places and drop boxes, gerrymandering and other dirty tricks, like giving tRump free media exposure (remember the 'breaking news' with a picture of tRump on the phone?) . Not even the 'heir apparent' Hillary Clinton got that! We should not blame Democrat voters when the deck is so clearly stacked against them.
Did I blame voters? I blamed the DNC (as does Robert Reich).
Mike Benson ; ("We know the answer, they would rather lose."). it sure looked that way!
I am not a fan of the DNC either, and do not contribute to it.
I disagree that Democrats would rather lose!
Agree. There is different thinking. Different solutions that people think is the way to go. But Democrats do not want to lose and surrender the country to the corrupt GOP.
Definitely not!
They fear losing. That is why they fear change.
Someone younger and more progressive should lead our country.
Definitely someone more progressive. I am 77 and progressive contributing to and writing about the woman's right to abortion, the rights of all to death with dignity, and against Russia and Putin's lust for empire and to be crowned Czar.
How? When repug regressives are blocking voting and filibustering everything and now have the 'advantage' of a stacked 'Supreme' court? they are going after laws on the books for decades that are popular, just because they can! Meanwhile the criminally wealthy are behind their every move, turning workers into slaves and disappearing the middle class and ending education as we know it. the Electoral College should be ended and a lot of Democrats would love to see that huge change!
We are at the time of needed generational change in American government. A picture of the leaders of Congress or the Surpreme Court looks like a social event at a nursing home.
That is not to discount the need for their wisdom. The wisdom of elders will be needed if America is to transition to a government fit for the 21st Century instead of one rooted in 18th Century compromises to slavery and genocide.
Both political parties are clearly to blame for not having succession planning. The risks now of sliding into a Central Asian type of dictatorship (nicely termed a "Presidential Republic") are clearly present. The lack of developing well-rounded and effective leaders across generations and social classes may be one of the failures of our elitist political class that costs us a democracy.
I want a younger person like BERNIE SANDERS :o)
Let's face it - WE ARE SCREWED.
Democratic Party has CEASED to even pretend that they represent normal working class people
WE NEED A BETTER CHOICE or learn to love the goose-step
WORK to GET BIG MONEY THE HELL OUT OF POLITICS
We need to get rid of the Electoral College and Citizens United, and now the Stacked Rogue 'Supreme' Court! (among other things, like anti voter laws and other un Democratic policies).
Definitely not tough enough domestically or foreign.
Younger more progressive blood and a woman!