Joe Biden officially declares he's running for reelection

[Spork3245]

If there is a legit candidate running against a president, meaning they have like 10-15% support at a minimum, then yea, have a debate, otherwise... lol, seriously? C'mon.

[TUFKAK]

Lol

 

wtf

 

The literal president of the United States isn’t doing debates with primary challengers, ridiculous to wish otherwise. He’s the guy we’re going with for better or worse and there’s nobody else regardless. What we gonna inspired for Kamala? 😂

[SaysWho?]

12 hours ago, Fizzzzle said:

Biden 2024 boys, he may actively work against labor movements

 

Nope, not gonna let you get away with that.  

 

I already detailed how he's strengthened labor and labor unions. As much as you talk labor, you didn't even know what a noncompete was, yo, and while I can understand how someone wouldn't know what it is, I honestly don't understand how someone can hold up labor so high if they don't even know one of the most anti-worker pieces of shit put into so many people's contracts? There's a lot he's done that you were unaware he did, or were unaware existed, and you can't keep confidently saying this stuff when it's not true.

[Keyser_Soze]

17 hours ago, GeneticBlueprint said:

 

Might buy one tbh

 

I want one too but $32 seems kind of steep.

[finaljedi]

3 hours ago, BloodyHell said:

It’s still anti-democratic bs, period. Especially from the guy who claims to be defending democracy. Does Williams or bozo have a real shot? Probably not, but the president should still be willing to debate them.

 

people were more than willing to criticize the RNC for saying they wouldn’t do presidential debates, but this isn’t even mentioned by anyone but independent news sources. I think it’s gross, and there should always be a debate, by law, if any opponent is polling at even 5%. Especially when the media is working to make sure you don’t know anyone else is running.
 

 

 

Debate what?  They aren't actual contenders, they're peacocking to sell books or whatever their goal is this year.  The actual Presidential debates matter more (I know i'll get disagreement here) in that they're about the only adversarial forum the candidates are subject to.  One of the two people on stage will be the President after those debates are done.  If you put the three Democrats on stage there is a 0% chance that the ones who aren't Joe Biden will be the candidate.  If Biden keeled over this year, neither one of those people would be the Democratic candidate.  The only thing that comes from a Democratic debate before the convention is the shame of the Kennedy family gets in a solid zinger that the Republicans run on cable news.  To paraphrase the late great Logan Roy, they aren't serious people.

 

The Republicans don't want to debate the Democrats because their policies are unpopular and their standard bearer is an imbecile.  Hell their main big public push lately has been fighting woke which doesn't even hold up to the simple question of "what the fuck are you talking about?", they aren't wanting an adversarial forum.

[MarSolo]

I think debates matter. That first debate hurt Trump more than people want to admit.

[GeneticBlueprint]

1 hour ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

I want one too but $32 seems kind of steep.

 

About the same price as a concert tee these days though. Which is like 99% of my wardrobe.

[Anathema-]

1 hour ago, GeneticBlueprint said:

 

About the same price as a concert tee these days though. Which is like 99% of my wardrobe.

 

Same idea too it's a donation more than an attempt to profit at scale. 

[Nokra]

4 hours ago, GeneticBlueprint said:

 

About the same price as a concert tee these days though. Which is like 99% of my wardrobe.

I paid $40 for a t-shirt at my last concert (Muse ). 

[GeneticBlueprint]

10 minutes ago, Nokra said:

I paid $40 for a t-shirt at my last concert (Muse ). 

I paid $50 at a recent one 

[Spork3245]

[Fizzzzle]

8 hours ago, SaysWho? said:

 

Nope, not gonna let you get away with that.  

 

I already detailed how he's strengthened labor and labor unions. As much as you talk labor, you didn't even know what a noncompete was, yo, and while I can understand how someone wouldn't know what it is, I honestly don't understand how someone can hold up labor so high if they don't even know one of the most anti-worker pieces of shit put into so many people's contracts? There's a lot he's done that you were unaware he did, or were unaware existed, and you can't keep confidently saying this stuff when it's not true.

Some day I will actually read your rebuttal, but reading, understanding and responding to it will literally take like an entire day, I'm not going to knee jerk it. My initial post took a few hours, rebutting your rebuttal basically involves going through all the sources again, checking what I said against what you said and figuring out if I'm right, it's a whole goddamn thing. I doubt I could do it in a single day, but if I DON'T do it in a single day I'll lose the plot.

 

Let's just say I'll go hard on that contracts and why no one has any incentive to change them, though. And even why your precious neoliberal Democrats will never do anything about it.

[Fizzzzle]

12 hours ago, Spork3245 said:

 

Dems split on Biden 2024 but most would back him: AP-NORC poll

WWW.PBS.ORG

---

The poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows that 26% of Americans overall want to see Biden run again — a slight recovery from the 22% who said that in January.

 

“Only about half of Democrats think President Joe Biden should run again in 2024, a poll shows, but a large majority say they'd be likely to support him if he became the nominee.“

 

This seems kind of normal after a first term, I dunno. Anecdotally I remember Obama being called “disappointing” near the end of his first term and that “maybe he should let someone else run”. But, tbf, I think a lot of that was on Slate and what-not, so literal garbage news outlets that were also speculating that the dems in 2008 wouldn’t honor the primary debates and just pick Al Gore so Hilary and Obama fans wouldn’t be upset from the rivalry or some nonsense  

 

 Lol, who is doing that? Stop pretending he’s awful and meet the middle ground of him being fine.

I don't see how any of that you said counters what I said. Of course people will support Biden against Trump. A large percentage of people say they will support him if he's the nominee, no shit. So will I until my thumbs go numb. In no universe would I rather have Trump than Biden. Those Democrats that said they don't want Biden to run again will 100% vote for him in 2024, myself included (assuming I live somewhere I can vote at the time)

 

That doesn't mean I don't think we deserve better.

[SaysWho?]

23 minutes ago, Fizzzzle said:

Some day I will actually read your rebuttal, but reading, understanding and responding to it will literally take like an entire day, I'm not going to knee jerk it. My initial post took a few hours, rebutting your rebuttal basically involves going through all the sources again, checking what I said against what you said and figuring out if I'm right, it's a whole goddamn thing. I doubt I could do it in a single day, but if I DON'T do it in a single day I'll lose the plot.

 

Let's just say I'll go hard on that contracts and why no one has any incentive to change them, though. And even why your precious neoliberal Democrats will never do anything about it.

 

I don't mind taking your time, and checking to see if you're right or not, but I hope you're not coming to conclusions before having the facts. Because no offense, but I find that's usually the case anytime I hear someone say "neoliberal" unironically. They’ve made up their mind labeling people in charge even though nobody subscribed to that label, and the number of them who want things done, but then don't realize those prized issues are getting done, is monumentally high, because the chase is more important than the goal.

 

Whereas I'd rather we work toward the goal and celebrate progress while pushing for more.

[Fizzzzle]

11 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

 

I don't mind taking your time, and checking to see if you're right or not, but I hope you're not coming to conclusions before having the facts. Because no offense, but I find that's usually the case anytime I hear someone say "neoliberal" unironically. They’ve made up their mind labeling people in charge even though nobody subscribed to that label, and the number of them who want things done, but then don't realize those prized issues are getting done, is monumentally high, because the chase is more important than the goal.

 

Whereas I'd rather we work toward the goal and celebrate progress while pushing for more.

I hate it when people don't recognize 'neoliberal' as a thing.

 

We're aiming for the same goal.

[Reputator]

6 hours ago, MarSolo said:

I think debates matter. That first debate hurt Trump more than people want to admit.

 

I think the Presidential debates are done. Trump only did, what was it...two of them against Biden? And maybe they move the needle, maybe they don't, but they're such an embarrassment to the country that I really hope they don't put on another one of those circuses.

[MarSolo]

1 hour ago, Reputator said:

 

I think the Presidential debates are done. Trump only did, what was it...two of them against Biden? And maybe they move the needle, maybe they don't, but they're such an embarrassment to the country that I really hope they don't put on another one of those circuses.

Oh, Trump would be insane to do another debate especially with how his mind has slipped downhill in the last decade. That first debate against Biden had him attacking Hunter for being a drug addict, which made him look like the world’s biggest asshole (more so than usual), and worse, he did it after Biden had said something touching about Beau.

[Keyser_Soze]

5 hours ago, SaysWho? said:

I don't mind taking your time, and checking to see if you're right or not, but I hope you're not coming to conclusions before having the facts.

 

By taking his time he means writing a multi-page rant before taking two minutes to read your reply.

[Spork3245]

12 hours ago, Fizzzzle said:

I don't see how any of that you said counters what I said.

Did you read my post? It’s normal: 

Why Obama should withdraw

WWW.CHICAGOTRIBUNE.COM

 

Some Dems refuse to back Obama - POLITICO

WWW.POLITICO.COM

---

On both ends of the spectrum, some are declining to give their unqualified support.

 

Why Obama needs a primary challenge | Reuters

WWW.REUTERS.COM

---

There is talk in the air of a Democratic challenge to Obama. Since the Tea Party won the battle of the debt ceiling, it has been solid bad news for the president, and his party is...

 

[stepee]

On 4/26/2023 at 5:21 AM, BloodyHell said:

It’s still anti-democratic bs, period. Especially from the guy who claims to be defending democracy. Does Williams or bozo have a real shot? Probably not, but the president should still be willing to debate them.

 

people were more than willing to criticize the RNC for saying they wouldn’t do presidential debates, but this isn’t even mentioned by anyone but independent news sources. I think it’s gross, and there should always be a debate, by law, if any opponent is polling at even 5%. Especially when the media is working to make sure you don’t know anyone else is running.
 

 

 

Look I’m sorry but conservatives don’t get to argue about the other side being anti democratic for at least another 30 years AFTER they stop spending the majority of their effort trying to just flat out get rid of democracy altogether. It’s like one of the few goals the movement even has and they are not beyond full on “democracy is bad actually” takes out in the open. Once I see them reversing their own voter suppression rules in order to make things more democratic I’ll start the timer.