Will Biden be elected President?

Watch
Ascend
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#81
Report 3 days ago
#81
(Original post by DSilva)
Whatever one thinks of Reagan's politics, he was a man of integrity.
As a shill for corporate interests? Even Nixon had more integrity than that.
0
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#82
Report 3 days ago
#82
(Original post by Ascend)
I don't think anyone is under the illusion that politicians don't go with pandering over principles but to be this transparent over it is surprising. Plus the only electorate he's pandering to here is a radical fringe. Pretty sure most voters are rolling their eyes.

The better play is to at least pretend to be picking the best possible candidate then go with an ethnic minority woman anyway.
Nah this is pretty mainstream liberal pandering. The radical fringe don't give a crap about gestures like this. As far as they're concerned he might as well be advocating for "more black female fascists".
0
reply
LiberOfLondon
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#83
Report 3 days ago
#83
(Original post by QE2)
Which is why I didn't say it.


Even ignoring the different nature of media, neither of those two came anywhere near Trump, in both craziness and sheer volume.
Understood.

My point was that ”my fellow Americans, we will begin bombing in five minutes” won't be remembered in the same way ”covfefe” will be due to the differing natures of media.
0
reply
LiberOfLondon
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#84
Report 3 days ago
#84
(Original post by Captain Haddock)
Nah this is pretty mainstream liberal pandering. The radical fringe don't give a crap about gestures like this. As far as they're concerned he might as well be advocating for "more black female fascists".
Yeah. If you're in the DSA or support the Justice Democrats you're not going to be persuaded to become a centrist Democrat by a black woman, and if you're not too keen on identity politics in the first place then Biden picking a black woman as his VP purely because of race won't win you over.
0
reply
generallee
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#85
Report 2 days ago
#85
(Original post by anarchism101)
A lot of younger Democrats (oddly it does tend to be generational rather than ideological - Sanders was less interested in procedural reforms than Buttigieg or O'Rourke), feeling burned after Obama's experience with McConnell, have spent a lot of time coming up with reform ideas to enshrine and strengthen a Democrat majority. Most notably the ideas of court-packing, scrapping the filibuster, and granting DC statehood, but there are others floating around too.
Well that is something to look forward to, then. Not.

It doesn't seem possible that America could be more socially and politically divided than it is now (the pre Civil War period excepted of course but that is hardly a cheering comparison is it?) but if the Dems pull those kind of nakedly partisan stunts it will go onto a whole new level of nastiness. How could such a prosperous, superpower of a society contemplate such acts of political suicide? It is stunning.

(Apologies for the delay in responding by the way, I have been offline for various reasons).
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#86
Report 2 days ago
#86
(Original post by generallee)
Well that is something to look forward to, then. Not.

It doesn't seem possible that America could be more socially and politically divided than it is now (the pre Civil War period excepted of course but that is hardly a cheering comparison is it?) but if the Dems pull those kind of nakedly partisan stunts it will go onto a whole new level of nastiness. How could such a prosperous, superpower of a society contemplate such acts of political suicide? It is stunning.

(Apologies for the delay in responding by the way, I have been offline for various reasons).
I struggle to see the filibuster surviving. It assumes shifting coalitions of support for individual policies. With monolithic voting blocs, it just looks like the frustration of democracy particularly when used for appointments. You can justify that the US would be better off without a law at all on this or that subject, but you can't really say that the US would be better off without anyone being the judge of this court or the ambassador to that country.
0
reply
LiberOfLondon
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#87
Report 2 days ago
#87
(Original post by generallee)
Well that is something to look forward to, then. Not.

It doesn't seem possible that America could be more socially and politically divided than it is now (the pre Civil War period excepted of course but that is hardly a cheering comparison is it?) but if the Dems pull those kind of nakedly partisan stunts it will go onto a whole new level of nastiness. How could such a prosperous, superpower of a society contemplate such acts of political suicide? It is stunning.

(Apologies for the delay in responding by the way, I have been offline for various reasons).
I'd be happier with any Democratic moves towards scrapping filibusters if the Dems didn't filibuster Republican bills they didn't like.
0
reply
generallee
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#88
Report 2 days ago
#88
(Original post by LiberOfLondon)
I'd be happier with any Democratic moves towards scrapping filibusters if the Dems didn't filibuster Republican bills they didn't like.
Absolutely.

I don't know how serious the proposals these proposals really are, though. Filibustering is a time honoured process both in the UK and the US, even if it is rather odd. To stop it would affect the balance of the legislature. And as you say, Dems might miss the theoretical opportunity to to do it themselves if the roles were reversed.

Granting Statehood to DC (and Puerto Rico) is a significant change that has other, unforeseen consequences. But above all, packing the Supreme Court is a nuclear option. Undiscussed since the time of FDR and even he didn't do it in the end.

There is a lot of talk, but I can't see it myself.
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#89
Report Thread starter 1 day ago
#89
(Original post by generallee)
Absolutely.

I don't know how serious the proposals these proposals really are, though. Filibustering is a time honoured process both in the UK and the US, even if it is rather odd. To stop it would affect the balance of the legislature. And as you say, Dems might miss the theoretical opportunity to to do it themselves if the roles were reversed.

Granting Statehood to DC (and Puerto Rico) is a significant change that has other, unforeseen consequences. But above all, packing the Supreme Court is a nuclear option. Undiscussed since the time of FDR and even he didn't do it in the end.

There is a lot of talk, but I can't see it myself.
Tbf when Republicans are in power they pull every lever and underhand trick to gerry meander the political landscape in their favour. Just take a look at how Republican governors have redran districts and congressional seats. To the point where in North Carolina in 2018, the vote was close to 50/50 yet the Republicans won about 10 seats to the Democrats 3.

Not to mention voter suppression!
0
reply
generallee
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#90
Report 1 day ago
#90
(Original post by DSilva)
Tbf when Republicans are in power they pull every lever and underhand trick to gerry meander the political landscape in their favour. Just take a look at how Republican governors have redran districts and congressional seats. To the point where in North Carolina in 2018, the vote was close to 50/50 yet the Republicans won about 10 seats to the Democrats 3.

Not to mention voter suppression!
That is true.

There is a difference between gerrymandering Congressional Districts and packing the Supreme Court though. Not in principle, perhaps, but definitely in consequence.

The Supreme Court in the US system is ridiculously politicised anyway. The closer you look at the US Constitution the more its fatally deep flaws become obvious. Or is it that the country is in palpable decline, so what was always there but glossed over, has become a symptom of a debilitating weakness in the polity?
1
reply
DJKL
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#91
Report 1 day ago
#91
(Original post by generallee)
That is true.

There is a difference between gerrymandering Congressional Districts and packing the Supreme Court though. Not in principle, perhaps, but definitely in consequence.

The Supreme Court in the US system is ridiculously politicised anyway. The closer you look at the US Constitution the more its fatally deep flaws become obvious. Or is it that the country is in palpable decline, so what was always there but glossed over, has become a symptom of a debilitating weakness in the polity?
I suspect your last sentence very much has a core of truth within, the USA appears to me ( an outsider) to have lost a part of its direction and purpose, its certainty as to what it is; better now get back to learning Mandarin.
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#92
Report Thread starter 1 day ago
#92
(Original post by generallee)
That is true.

There is a difference between gerrymandering Congressional Districts and packing the Supreme Court though. Not in principle, perhaps, but definitely in consequence.

The Supreme Court in the US system is ridiculously politicised anyway. The closer you look at the US Constitution the more its fatally deep flaws become obvious. Or is it that the country is in palpable decline, so what was always there but glossed over, has become a symptom of a debilitating weakness in the polity?
It's politicised because the President chooses who gets to be on it when there's a vacancy.

I've always found that bizarre. If you were talking in the abstract about a system where the President picks members of the Supreme Court based on those members political views, you'd think we were talking about a tinpot dictatorship, not the USA.

The country is in decline but that's been massively accelerated by its current President turning turning the office of Presidency into an international laughing stock.
Last edited by DSilva; 1 day ago
0
reply
LiberOfLondon
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#93
Report 1 day ago
#93
(Original post by generallee)
Absolutely.

I don't know how serious the proposals these proposals really are, though. Filibustering is a time honoured process both in the UK and the US, even if it is rather odd. To stop it would affect the balance of the legislature. And as you say, Dems might miss the theoretical opportunity to to do it themselves if the roles were reversed.

Granting Statehood to DC (and Puerto Rico) is a significant change that has other, unforeseen consequences. But above all, packing the Supreme Court is a nuclear option. Undiscussed since the time of FDR and even he didn't do it in the end.

There is a lot of talk, but I can't see it myself.
I don't think the Dems would scrap the filibuster purely because if there was a Republican majority it takes away their power of filibustering bills.

I'm not opposed for statehood for DC and Puerto Rico because they meet all the criteria. Opposing statehood for borinqueños purely because they lean blue is very cynical and anti-democratic (no pun intended).

As for packing the court, that would not be seen well internationally.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#94
Report 1 day ago
#94
(Original post by generallee)
That is true.

There is a difference between gerrymandering Congressional Districts and packing the Supreme Court though. Not in principle, perhaps, but definitely in consequence.

The Supreme Court in the US system is ridiculously politicised anyway. The closer you look at the US Constitution the more its fatally deep flaws become obvious. Or is it that the country is in palpable decline, so what was always there but glossed over, has become a symptom of a debilitating weakness in the polity?
I think the Conservative side of the Supreme Court is sorting itself out. I think history will look a lot less kindly on the Scalia years. Given the differences of political view amongst the Founders within a mercantilist society, Originalism ought to produce a bit of a coin toss in answer to questions which the Foounders never asked and never considered. Under Scalia, it always seemed that the Constitution was originally written by late 20th Century Conservative Catholics and Thomas and Alito followed where he led.

I think the problem on the Liberal side is the lack of interest in law and the economy.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#95
Report 1 day ago
#95
(Original post by generallee)
That is true.

There is a difference between gerrymandering Congressional Districts and packing the Supreme Court though. Not in principle, perhaps, but definitely in consequence.

The Supreme Court in the US system is ridiculously politicised anyway. The closer you look at the US Constitution the more its fatally deep flaws become obvious. Or is it that the country is in palpable decline, so what was always there but glossed over, has become a symptom of a debilitating weakness in the polity?
The lifetime tenure makes a big difference to the Supreme Court.

Very noticeably the Scalia-Alito-Thomas axis has broken down. There is no longer the politically loaded Originalism that we used to see from Scalia and Thomas is now ploughing a lone furrow, basically claiming everyone has got it wrong for the last 230 years.
0
reply
generallee
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#96
Report 1 day ago
#96
(Original post by DJKL)
I suspect your last sentence very much has a core of truth within, the USA appears to me ( an outsider) to have lost a part of its direction and purpose, its certainty as to what it is; better now get back to learning Mandarin.
I think that is right. There has long been a debate as to whether empires decline and fall because of a rotting away at the centre, caused by decadence, hubris and division, or just the superior force of the opponents, the barbarians storming the gates. It dates back right to Edward Gibbon. It was both of course, but which predominated?

He argued Rome collapsed from within, and when we look at what is happening now in the US with a bunch of spoilt rich kids tearing down statues of George Washington and Christopher Columbus, with the refrain that the entire nation state is illegitimate, and the rest of the country seemingly not bothered enough to do anything except turn off the TV, it is hard not to feel that the American Empire is dying from the inside, too.

The difference in vigour, enterprise and moral certainty between the founding fathers and great pioneers (ruthless though they were, and had to be) and the current generation of entitled, spoilt, childish Ivy League snowflakes, the so called future of the country, is quite stunning to behold.

No-one seems to appreciate how dangerous and destructive it is to erase a nation's past, its myths and shibboleths. No-one considers what can be put inside the hollowed out shell. Or maybe it is a symptom, not a cause of the decline?
3
reply
howisladypole
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#97
Report 1 day ago
#97
(Original post by LiberOfLondon)
Yeah, what could possibly go wrong with putting someone with dementia in the White House?
Not to worry, he'll quickly be 'removed' and the VP will take over.
0
reply
LiberOfLondon
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#98
Report 1 day ago
#98
(Original post by howisladypole)
Not to worry, he'll quickly be 'removed' and the VP will take over.
The big question is who the VP will be.
0
reply
howisladypole
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#99
Report 1 day ago
#99
(Original post by LiberOfLondon)
The big question is who the VP will be.
I'm expecting someone like Kamala Harris. :/
0
reply
LiberOfLondon
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#100
Report 1 day ago
#100
(Original post by howisladypole)
I'm expecting someone like Kamala Harris. :/
It does look that way.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What are you most likely to do if you don't get the grades you were expecting?

Go through Clearing (52)
40.94%
Take autumn exams (47)
37.01%
Look for a job (2)
1.57%
Consider an apprenticeship (3)
2.36%
Take a year out (15)
11.81%
Something else (let us know in the thread!) (8)
6.3%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed