ADVERTISEMENT

This is the Democratic Party.

This is an interesting story. A group of migrants attack two NYC police officers. They are arrested and then released without having to post bail. Four of them have now fled to California under fake names. NYC DA has thus far refused to comment on the decision to release them with no bail requirements

 
This is an interesting story. A group of migrants attack two NYC police officers. They are arrested and then released without having to post bail. Four of them have now fled to California under fake names. NYC DA has thus far refused to comment on the decision to release them with no bail requirements

equal justice. maybe Trump should have just beat up the loan officer
 
Starting to wonder if Biden makes it to November as the Dem nominee. Questions of his competence are going to continue to build and his low polling numbers will only increase the pressure for him to step aside.
 
Skimming through this report, he might not make it through the weekend ...
 
Dems set him up by allowing him to do that press conference. Especially coming off the special counsel report.

CNN headline “Biden disputes competency report and moments later mixed up the country Egypt’s leader runs”. He’s done.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: HuffyCane
Ah OK. That thing. Not going to read an extensive legal document. I barely made it through the executive summary of the Muller report. Had to swear off any legal documents after that. Well, other than reports I have to write myself as an expert.
 
Ah OK. That thing. Not going to read an extensive legal document. I barely made it through the executive summary of the Muller report. Had to swear off any legal documents after that. Well, other than reports I have to write myself as an expert.
Cliff notes: Reagan arguably did the same thing. He’s a forgetful old man a jury is likely to forgive and we don’t try cases we might lose. Also, Trump is more guilty even though it isn’t our job to say so.

Still, this quote will haunt him to November describing him as: ““sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

And going into a press conference denying something that was either electronically recorded or was recorded in the contemporaneous hand written notes of multiple people is not a good plan. Calling the Justice Department liars is not an effective long range strategy for remaining a free man. Especially when they have been extraordinarily restrained in the prosecution of your son.
 
Last edited:
It’s winning the battle (not being prosecuted) but losing the war (either not being the Dem nominee or losing as the Dem nominee). I predict you’re finally going to see the media as well as the Dem machine question his competency in an effort to force him out of the race.
 
It’s winning the battle (not being prosecuted) but losing the war (either not being the Dem nominee or losing as the Dem nominee). I predict you’re finally going to see the media as well as the Dem machine question his competency in an effort to force him out of the race.
It looks to me like the folks you are talking about already had the Justice Department do the dirty work for them.

Presidential elections are won in three or four of seven states based on turnout. He was at 33% approval in some of those key precincts before this announcement.

I just don’t see how he recovers. It would take zero inflation, record low interest rates and peace accords in two war theaters. In less than a year and while campaigning at his age.
 
It’s winning the battle (not being prosecuted) but losing the war (either not being the Dem nominee or losing as the Dem nominee). I predict you’re finally going to see the media as well as the Dem machine question his competency in an effort to force him out of the race.
I do agree what is going on here is that they can’t incarcerate him. Logistically that’s too problematic for anyone in his eighties. And that’s before you build a special prison for him and the Secret Service. So they punish him the only way that will truly hurt him and all he cares about - tarnish his history.

Exit question: now that the file is closed. They can’t withhold it from Congress. Impeachment for the acts mentioned while in office? He apparently admitted on tape he knew the records were classified and he continued the felonious behavior while in office. Lower standard of proof in front of Congress …
 
I do agree what is going on here is that they can’t incarcerate him. Logistically that’s too problematic for anyone in his eighties. And that’s before you build a special prison for him and the Secret Service. So they punish him the only way that will truly hurt him and all he cares about - tarnish his history.

Exit question: now that the file is closed. They can’t withhold it from Congress. Impeachment for the acts mentioned while in office? He apparently admitted on tape he knew the records were classified and he continued the felonious behavior while in office. Lower standard of proof in front of Congress …
I would hope Congress leaves him alone as far as impeachment. The damage has been done. No reason for any more divisive actions imo. Let him finish out his term and retire.
 
Last edited:
I say throw him and Trump both in jail until they croak.…. Start fresh with a new set of candidates.
 
Trump has memory problems of a serious nature too. Who has the poorer memory doesn't matter if during a speech Trump carries on about Nancy Pelosi as if she is Haley for several minutes. His memory is enough of an impairment to make him not capable as a President either. He is probably more guilty of crimes against the use of and sharing of classified information. I just wish Colorado & the like hadn't attempted to throw him off the ballot in a losing battle before he has been determined guilty of insurrection. It's awfully funny how all this comes out on Biden, but Trump gets to delay, and delay, while Republican officials do everything the can, to protect him until he is elected. Then all of this disappears on Trump.

Throw them both out of the presidential race, and let somebody like Michelle Obama duke it out with Haley. I'll take Haley, and she can make Cheney her VP.(like that would go over well) Do we start the primary's over again if one or both of them drop out? This is all rather ludicrous. I don't know that Biden is going to live for 4 1/2 more years. But it is a poor joke on the american public that Biden is taken down, when Trump has committed much more egregious and illegal acts, and has a crappy memory as well. That is just a downright preposterous situation.
 
Last edited:
This is certainly the oddest political story I’ve ever witnessed. The Pubs (at least the smart ones) will now want to keep Biden in the race. Contrast to Biden’s own party who desperately want him to drop out and will be doing everything they can in front of and behind the scenes to make that occur. Never have seen anything like this on the Presidential scale. Biden is old and stubborn but I don’t see him surviving as his party’s nominee. Not because of the Pubs but because of his own party. CNN questioning his competency last night is just the beginning. Going to make for great political theater.
 
This is certainly the oddest political story I’ve ever witnessed. The Pubs (at least the smart ones) will now want to keep Biden in the race. Contrast to Biden’s own party who desperately want him to drop out and will be doing everything they can in front of and behind the scenes to make that occur. Never have seen anything like this on the Presidential scale. Biden is old and stubborn but I don’t see him surviving as his party’s nominee. Not because of the Pubs but because of his own party. CNN questioning his competency last night is just the beginning. Going to make for great political theater.
You are exactly right. Until you’ve worked in Presidential campaigns it’s difficult to understand the degree to which the candidate you work for and the messaging is not your first priority. Nor is it playing defense with rapid response, though that has taken on a larger role in recent years with people obsessed with winning Twitter, a state with no delegates. It’s the amount of time and money, years in advance, to cultivate a free public discourse around the person you want to run against and against the people you don’t want the opposing party to nominate.

This was never more evident than the 1972 election where the President won by the biggest landslide in American history but saw it all come down obstructing justice into a federal probe into a campaign effort to influence who the Democrats would nominate. An election he would have won handily anyway.

It also reminds me of Dole in 1996. Nobody liked the guy outside of his friends in the Senate and he was a terrible retail politician outside of farm country or in front of WWII veterans. Yet, he won the nomination in a landslide. Meanwhile, every Republican you talked to on the street seemed to think Steve Forbes or Pat Buchanan should be the nominee depending upon their geographic location and tax bracket. Nobody seemed to notice the Clinton people were pouring money to outside messaging that turns up in punditry building Dole up as a successor to the Bush, not Reagan, era policies. And Dole ended up winning before the race started.
 
Last edited:
You are exactly right. Until you’ve worked in Presidential campaigns it’s difficult to understand the degree to which the candidate you work for and the messaging is not your first priority. Nor is it playing defense with rapid response, though that has taken on a larger role in recent years with people obsessed with winning Twitter, a state with no delegates. It’s the amount of time and money, years in advance, to cultivate a free public discourse around the person you want to run against and against the people you don’t want the opposing party to nominate.

This was never more evident than the 1972 election where the President won by the biggest landslide in American history but saw it all come down obstructing justice into a federal probe into a campaign effort to influence who the Democrats would nominate. An election he would have won handily anyway.

It also reminds me of Dole in 1996. Nobody liked the guy outside of his friends in the Senate and he was a terrible retail politician outside of farm country or in front of WWII veterans. Yet, he won the nomination in a landslide. Meanwhile, every Republican you talked to on the street seemed to think Steve Forbes or Pat Buchanan should be the nominee depending upon their geographic location and tax bracket. Nobody seemed to notice the Clinton people were pouring money to outside messaging that turns up in punditry building Dole up as a successor to the Bush, not Reagan, era policies. And Dole ended up winning before the race started.
Just like McCain.. It was Dole's turn... Just like Hillary in '16...
 
  • Like
Reactions: drboobay
Just like McCain.. It was Dole's turn... Just like Hillary in '16...
Totally disagree. You may be suffering from a bit of confirmation bias/hindsight.

Thats a classic example of the opposition running against who they wanted to run against.

There wasn't "turns". The field was crowded with the Bush people signaling quietly that presumed front runner Guiliani was their preferred choice while staying neutral.

Huckabee won Iowa and had the evangelical vote going in to New Hampshire. A lot of momentum and was all over right wing media. He's still on TV today. Guiliani's people were stunned at the loss and you can argue his life has never been the same since. By the time all the New York transplants failed to vote for him in Florida he was out.

Romney had all the money, the establishment, Wall Street, and surprisingly good showings with veterans, women, and the suburbs, people though were McCain's bread and butter. He was the nominee during the next cycle on the strength of the apparatus he started building in 2003 or the apparatus his Dad build in 1963, depending on who you ask.

McCain was absolutely despised, almost a pariah with the party insiders, for his campaign finance deal with the Democrats, not to mention his endless list of tantrums, insults, and boorish behavior alienating everyone in Washington. People grossly estimate how much John McCain was hated by his "friends" even before he was a POW. McCain burned every bridge after 2000 when he felt the deck was stacked against him for W.

It was by far from a case of it was McCain's turn. Had he not won New Hampshire in a surprise over Romney, on the strength of Independent and Democrat voters crossing over to vote for him in New Hampshire, McCain would have been out of the race. And how did they do that? Democrat funded GOTV campaigns. Why would Demo dark money spend money on a popular Republican candidate? They wanted to run against him, not a photogenic successful Massachusetts governor with a history of purple policies like health care reform and numbers off the charts amongst women in the suburbs - the demographic that has determined every election since 1952.

I joined the McCain campaign in South Carolina the following month. I can tell you first hand, nobody thought it was "our turn". They were certainly paying us like it wouldn't even be our week next week.

He was down to his son, a travel aide, and about $50,000 in the bank before he started taking Democrat money to win to in NH. He was flying Southwest to Iowa and driving to NH in rental cars from DC. And that was despite more than a decade of national name recognition and the benefit of a Senate campaign finance law that allowed him to switch Senate donations into his Presidential account that non-Senator candidates couldn't do. (If you've ever wondered why so many Senators run for President with no chances of winning, this is why. They can harvest millions in donations made just in case he/she actually gets the nomination, run a rope a dope campaign, maybe knock out a candidate or two that their friends dont like, then convert the left over funds into their state re-election war chest and keep their seat safe).

We really didn't see an uptick in Republican side donations of any notable and sustainable amount until about a week after New Hampshire and they had the money to hire mercs like me.

And we didn't think we had any breathing room until after Florida where a purple Governor endorsed us in what was a purple state at the time.

After Florida, the way the convention rules were set up, we really only needed a hand full of states. So it was over by Super Tuesday. I went on to do other things by summer. Maybe that is why you got a feeling of it being his "turn" or "inevitable" or a smoke filled room picking who was going to lose one for the team. But it was simply a winner take all format where 5 early wins went it was basically impossible to knock you out. McCain won in three of them ... all purple states with folks crossing over.

In hindsight, with the Bush fatigue, Republicans could have run a Christ-Eisenhower ticket in 2008 and lost. But at the time, the Democrats were divided and Hillary Clinton divided the country. They were trying every thing imaginable to make sure the Republicans ran the weakest candidate possible. And the Republicans did. Because Democrats influenced who was running on the other side.

Speaking of Hillary, if she had a "turn" it wasn't in 2016, it was in 2008, and we saw how that turned out. We are talking about people spending millions to get billions in ROI. There isnt any "turns."

Its nothing unusual or bad. Not even sour grapes. Its the game. And gamers game or they are out. McCain showed twice he couldn't game at all. And the Palin pick just made it plain for everyone to see.
 
Last edited:
When I think "it was their time" it's more of a metaphysical thing to me. It's more like, "if it were ever going to happen, it had to happen then." Or perhaps, "theypaid their dues, they deserved it have it then." It's not really a political statement.

I voted for Dole and McCain. And Obama over Romney. But I would never want to be part of a political club or fraternity that promotes conformity of thought or circling the wagons. It is really distasteful, but I get that it's the reality of how our leaders get picked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HuffyCane
When I think "it was their time" it's more of a metaphysical thing to me. It's more like, "if it were ever going to happen, it had to happen then." Or perhaps, "theypaid their dues, they deserved it have it then." It's not really a political statement.

I voted for Dole and McCain. And Obama over Romney. But I would never want to be part of a political club or fraternity that promotes conformity of thought or circling the wagons. It is really distasteful, but I get that it's the reality of how our leaders get picked.
You can argue the opposite. Each party is a group of separate interest groups bound together to elect a candidate to common ends. The current changing nature of those alliances require maximum turnout to ensure candidate success. So it isnt so much ideological purity demanding the conformity as it is expediency and pragmatism.

Why else does a large percentage of disaffected working class voters go feet first jumping in with the millionaire tax break crowd? If you've built part of your party's platform on social programs appealing to Latinos, you need every one of them to vote if you lose large numbers of them to increasing concerns about abortion policy, small business regulation, and job displacement. With that type of internal pressure to maximize every vote, its tempting to see the demands for conformity as harmful when its really the diversity of thought that is driving politics.

Strange and changing times.
 
When I think "it was their time" it's more of a metaphysical thing to me. It's more like, "if it were ever going to happen, it had to happen then." Or perhaps, "theypaid their dues, they deserved it have it then." It's not really a political statement.

I voted for Dole and McCain. And Obama over Romney. But I would never want to be part of a political club or fraternity that promotes conformity of thought or circling the wagons. It is really distasteful, but I get that it's the reality of how our leaders get picked.
Ive spent almost five decades around federal, state, and local office holders, party cronies, campaign operatives, pundits, reporters, lobbyists, bureaucrats, and countless other folks, I dont think I've ever heard one of them say they are supporting Candidate X, because it is their "turn." Or it had to happen then. Or this is their one shot. The stakes are too high, the rewards too great, the egos too large. If anything, what I hear is people looking to knock off folks who think it is their turn or time. Or their candidacy is inevitable. People really detest that from the backrooms to the polling booth.

How many times has the current Democratic nominee run? 4 times? Nixon lost in 1960. Reagan stuck his toe in the water three times before jumping. Hillary ran twice and wants to run again. DeSantis will be back. Romney ran twice and might run again given a chance. Maybe the only two candidates who can say it was "their" "time" or it had to happen then, if ever, is JFK and BHO. But that had more to do with historic demographic changes and economic factors than any personal qualities or "their time."
 
Last edited:
I'll say one thing., the Democrat's apparatus should have decided on this months ago, and operated faster. After the primaries have already begun in early February is coming to the party a little bit late.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HuffyCane
Too late in most states. Passed the filing deadline.

No mechanism exists to change him out under the current rules, even if he pulled out,

To do it against his will, he would need to get the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee, stacked with people appointed by Biden who gave him money to draft and approve any method to replace them, then most of the Super Delegates and a majority of the committed delegates to suspend the rules to consider another candidate. Then the larger executive committee would have to approve it. Thats like 251/500 vote.

However, if he stated he was pulling out, then the executive committee would vote.

In both cases, there’s no mechanism requiring the Vice President to take the President’s place. Rest assured she’s got eyes and boots on the ground though.

And if done after ballots are mailed to the Armed Forces in September, an avalanche of litigation would ensue.
 
I don't think coming in with somebody this late is a wise move at all. The only candidate I've heard mentioned that polled well, is Michelle Obama, and I see her blowing out, not up, coming in this late. Don't see how she or anybody else is going to stun/storm the Trump organization, and win it in a cloud of rain & thunder this late.
 
Too late in most states. Passed the filing deadline.

No mechanism exists under the current rules, even if he pulled out,

To do it against his will, he would need to get the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee, stacked with people appointed by Biden who gave him money to draft and approve any method to replace them, then most of the Super Delegates and a majority of the committed delegates to suspend the rules to consider another candidate. Then the larger executive committee would have to approve it. Thats like 251/500 vote.

However, if he stated he was pulling out, then the executive committee would vote.

In both cases, there’s no mechanism requiring the Vice President to take the President’s place. Rest assured she’s got eyes and boots on the ground though.

And if done after ballots are mailed to the Armed Forces in September, an avalanche of litigation would ensue.
Then what is their plan? And Harris would lose worse than Biden. That can't be their plan.
 
I dunno, they were something like 2 votes away from replacing Hillary in 2016 when she collapsed in 2016 on 9/11. The vote of the DNC leadership was like 3-6 against her being removed. That story doesn’t get around much but it happened.
 
I'll say one thing., the Democrat's apparatus should have decided on this months ago, and operated faster. After the primaries have already begun in early February is coming to the party a little bit late.
I’m convinced the Dems thought they could keep him hidden until November. Have him do a few well rehearsed stump speeches. Maybe an interview with a friendly journalist where Biden has the questions and written answers prior. Survive a couple of debates where foreign policy is omitted as a topic. Why they allowed him (maybe he demanded) that presser last night is beyond me. Maybe he was told not to take questions? Would have been much more effective to allow his surrogates to challenge the opinion of the special counsel imo.
 
My sense is that he’s the President. He wanted to do it. And wasn’t going to be told no. Because he doesn’t know how far gone he is. Like your grandfather when he couldn’t remember your name or add 10+25 but was still filing his taxes and trading stocks at age 90. But flies into a rage when he spills his breakfast all over himself but it’s your fault for serving scrambled eggs.
 
My sense is that he’s the President. He wanted to do it. And wasn’t going to be told no. Because he doesn’t know how far gone he is. Like your grandfather when he couldn’t remember your name or add 10+25 but was still filing his taxes and trading stocks at age 90. But flies into a rage when he spills his breakfast all over himself but it’s your fault for serving scrambled eggs.
If he was insistent on doing it, that's where having Hunter or Jill help to convince him, would have been beneficial. Someone who he would trust to look after his best interest, even more than trusted aids.
 
This confusing the president of mexico and egypt, is really similar to Haley and Pelosi. I would think the democrats would be playing that up more so for damage control. They both went on about it for several minutes, making it obvious it wasn't an isolated slip of the tongue.
 
This confusing the president of mexico and egypt, is really similar to Haley and Pelosi. I would think the democrats would be playing that up more so for damage control. They both went on about it for several minutes, making it obvious it wasn't an isolated slip of the tongue.
You’re assuming the Dems want to defend Biden.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noble cane
Totally disagree. You may be suffering from a bit of confirmation bias/hindsight.

Thats a classic example of the opposition running against who they wanted to run against.

There wasn't "turns". The field was crowded with the Bush people signaling quietly that presumed front runner Guiliani was their preferred choice while staying neutral.

Huckabee won Iowa and had the evangelical vote going in to New Hampshire. A lot of momentum and was all over right wing media. He's still on TV today. Guiliani's people were stunned at the loss and you can argue his life has never been the same since. By the time all the New York transplants failed to vote for him in Florida he was out.

Romney had all the money, the establishment, Wall Street, and surprisingly good showings with veterans, women, and the suburbs, people though were McCain's bread and butter. He was the nominee during the next cycle on the strength of the apparatus he started building in 2003 or the apparatus his Dad build in 1963, depending on who you ask.

McCain was absolutely despised, almost a pariah with the party insiders, for his campaign finance deal with the Democrats, not to mention his endless list of tantrums, insults, and boorish behavior alienating everyone in Washington. People grossly estimate how much John McCain was hated by his "friends" even before he was a POW. McCain burned every bridge after 2000 when he felt the deck was stacked against him for W.

It was by far from a case of it was McCain's turn. Had he not won New Hampshire in a surprise over Romney, on the strength of Independent and Democrat voters crossing over to vote for him in New Hampshire, McCain would have been out of the race. And how did they do that? Democrat funded GOTV campaigns. Why would Demo dark money spend money on a popular Republican candidate? They wanted to run against him, not a photogenic successful Massachusetts governor with a history of purple policies like health care reform and numbers off the charts amongst women in the suburbs - the demographic that has determined every election since 1952.

I joined the McCain campaign in South Carolina the following month. I can tell you first hand, nobody thought it was "our turn". They were certainly paying us like it wouldn't even be our week next week.

He was down to his son, a travel aide, and about $50,000 in the bank before he started taking Democrat money to win to in NH. He was flying Southwest to Iowa and driving to NH in rental cars from DC. And that was despite more than a decade of national name recognition and the benefit of a Senate campaign finance law that allowed him to switch Senate donations into his Presidential account that non-Senator candidates couldn't do. (If you've ever wondered why so many Senators run for President with no chances of winning, this is why. They can harvest millions in donations made just in case he/she actually gets the nomination, run a rope a dope campaign, maybe knock out a candidate or two that their friends dont like, then convert the left over funds into their state re-election war chest and keep their seat safe).

We really didn't see an uptick in Republican side donations of any notable and sustainable amount until about a week after New Hampshire and they had the money to hire mercs like me.

And we didn't think we had any breathing room until after Florida where a purple Governor endorsed us in what was a purple state at the time.

After Florida, the way the convention rules were set up, we really only needed a hand full of states. So it was over by Super Tuesday. I went on to do other things by summer. Maybe that is why you got a feeling of it being his "turn" or "inevitable" or a smoke filled room picking who was going to lose one for the team. But it was simply a winner take all format where 5 early wins went it was basically impossible to knock you out. McCain won in three of them ... all purple states with folks crossing over.

In hindsight, with the Bush fatigue, Republicans could have run a Christ-Eisenhower ticket in 2008 and lost. But at the time, the Democrats were divided and Hillary Clinton divided the country. They were trying every thing imaginable to make sure the Republicans ran the weakest candidate possible. And the Republicans did. Because Democrats influenced who was running on the other side.

Speaking of Hillary, if she had a "turn" it wasn't in 2016, it was in 2008, and we saw how that turned out. We are talking about people spending millions to get billions in ROI. There isnt any "turns."

Its nothing unusual or bad. Not even sour grapes. Its the game. And gamers game or they are out. McCain showed twice he couldn't game at all. And the Palin pick just made it plain for everyone to see.
Do you think that Republicans didnt have anything to do with the race between Hillary and Obama? It’s not one side only that plays those games.
 
Do you think that Republicans didnt have anything to do with the race between Hillary and Obama? It’s not one side only that plays those games.
It's like folks are proud of machiavellian tactics of politics. I find it sickening. Repulsive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gmoney4WW
Do you think that Republicans didnt have anything to do with the race between Hillary and Obama? It’s not one side only that plays those games.
Yep. Definitely a lot of dark money Facebook ads being bought in 2008 trying to bleed her and have her limp into the fall. Backfired.
 
You’re assuming the Dems want to defend Biden.
I'd say somewhere between 60 and 85% of his administration want to defend him. I think that number is closer to the higher end. I'm not assuming that the party in general wants to defend him. Those who do are not using that argument strongly enough.
 
I'd say somewhere between 60 and 85% of his administration want to defend him. I think that number is closer to the higher end. I'm not assuming that the party in general wants to defend him. Those who do are not using that argument strongly enough.
It’s not everyday you see David Alexrod, James Carville, Tucker Carlson and John Kasich all saying the same thing.

This is a real problem that paid messaging and time cannot overcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gmoney4WW
Well if Biden is looking to help the Democratic party win the Presidency, he & the party would quietly help build up the image of whomever the party plans to support between now & the convention.(the chosen one picked due to strong polling against Trump) Then Biden would would drop out right before the convention, & symbolically give his delegates to the person the Democrats wanted to support, and the brokered convention would then officially select that person.

This would help jumpstart the campaign in the news. Get the person's name and views across, & play on whether Trump would debate them. Whichever way Trump went on debating would determine how the campaign ran. A shock & awe campaign at the last moment is the only way a campaign could catch up to Trump.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT