[55] JFC's comments are what spot on what I was saying, so I leave it at that. Hope you are doing well; Idaho having a real COVID surge now.

You are confused. Hillary wasn't financing an election by making paid speeches at G-S, so how is public financing of elections relevant? Who finances a campaign with book sales?

No. I don't agree with that at all and the point about McConnell is not that he is enriching himself personally. He married into money. The point is that he is the main facilitator of political corruption and he's openly proud of it.

C. R. Stucki wrote:

John FC

And it's common knowledge that people seeking political favors buy politician's books at inflated prices by the thousands without any intention of anybody ever reading them. Simply disguised bribery.

Agreed. None of these guys pay that kind of money out of "Civic duty" or some such. It's very much "pay to play" IMO and a reason that we need Public Financing of elections in America -- to include the top FIVE vote gathering Parties so we can get the views of Parties that aren't one of the "tweedle dee and tweedle dum" Parties as Ralph Nader phrased it.

That's my main point, that Biden is every bit as guilty as all other politicians.

Nothing like a good Keith Olbermann rant to get the blood heated up!

This one is The 50 Worst Trump Atrocities

We can only go by what you said and you said "Biden and all his kids, family, in-laws and out-laws, are all millionaires, and most all of them never had an honest job."

All and never are words that don't leave a lot of room for nuance. I'm glad you cleared that up. Hunter Biden took advantage of his father's name. That hardly indicts the rest of the family.

Beau Biden has been dead for more than 5 yrs. I wouldn't know if he ever profited from Dad's political connections, and didn't mean to imply that he had.

In reality, most of the books that non-presidential grade politicians (and even some presidential-grade) write, and the speeches they are paid to make actually do serve as proxies for political bribery.

Do you think perhaps the $gazillion speeches that Hillary delivered to the people at Goldman-Sachs were intended by G-S to train their people on how to make smart market trades?

And it's common knowledge that people seeking political favors buy politician's books at inflated prices by the thousands without any intention of anybody ever reading them. Simply disguised bribery.

I never intended to imply that Mrs. Joe Biden is venal, or actually to make any comments about her whatsoever. I thought you were talking about the Jill somebody who ran in 2016.

I think maybe CRS gets his info from the conservative entertainment complex.

I really didn't intend to include any of the 3rd party candidates in that post. Talking Trump and Biden exclusively. No 3rd party candidate ever has a chance in our system.

Alright -- cool.

Heya CRS, I feel ya! Although I have warmed to Biden since he won the nomination (thanks, Elizabeth Miller!) I myself remain a Bernie Bro at heart.

Looking over Jill Biden's [nee Jacobs] biography, it's pretty hard to see why you say she's venal and has never held an honest job, unless you consider waitressing, public HS English teaching, and community college teaching (which she continued to do as a day job while Joe was VP) to be dishonest and venal professions.

Can you provide some insight?

CRS already cast a ballot for biden, and we both congratulated him for it.

JL

i added the qualification because one has always had to be at least a little for sale in order to be successful at ANY level of politics. to think otherwise would be more naive than you could possibly take credit for.

a politician with integrity is not one with no transactional behavior, it's one who does his transactions on issues that aren't all that important so he can serve the People and refuse to do business on things that truly matter. this is how i see joe biden.

JL

So does that mean you're actually going to vote for Trump? Or are you simply as dissatisfied with your choices in 2020 as you were in 2016?

Inquiring minds want to know.

From my heroes at The Lincoln Project:

Rats

Last Call

Biden's Moment

Brave Women

Fairy Tale

How to Talk with Your MAGA Friends & Family

Pathetic

Men

Y'all welcome!

Biden and all his kids, family, in-laws and out-laws, are all millionaires, and most all of them never had an honest job.

Of course, when you say "as Washington politicians go", perhaps that validates your point!

I agree that he chose very well.

In thinking about his cabinet, I hope he'll consider Marie Yovanovitch for Secretary of State, and either Preet Bharara or Glenn Kirschner for AG.

Just as those who are completely without conscience can pursue power without concern over destroying a nation and its history, those who are completely without attachment to legality, propriety, and norms apparently experience no impedance to taking an illegitimate appointment.

Perhaps that is the reason why a justice who is so apparently lacking in mental capacity to be a justice had to be chosen, just as a president totally lacking in mental capacity to be president was necessary for the advancement of illegitimate ends.

The remedy for this? Boundaries! It is important to recognize that the lack of mental capacity exists, often undetectable (especially when they have what Harvey Cleckly called “the mask of sanity”), and a simple mental fitness test would get rid of this problem.

And, if applied universally, it would get rid of 99.9% of atrocities in the world!

I like to see both a civics test and a mental fitness test administered to all candidates running for office from local to federal.

Incidentally, what do you think of Biden's running mate?

I think Biden chose well. It felt good to me the minute he announced it would be Senator Harris. Admittedly, she wasn't my firsh choice. Mostly because my first choice was a man. But, what are ya gonna do? :)

Okay, yes, I can see what you're saying and there's no denying that the Great Depression was unprecedented and required radical change if most people were to have a chance at surviving it.

Isn't it odd then that republicans are still determined to eradicate Social Security, the change at the heart of the New Deal? That's like mega-delayed backlash. They really know how to hold a grudge, don't they. And if returned to power, I think they will get rid of it along with the ACA, Medicare and Medicaid.

Also, what changes did Obama make that caused a backlash in 2016? And can it really be called a backlash when Hillary Clinton won the second highest vote total in election history and the GOP had to cheat to win?

CAN I CHANGE MY VOTE? This refers changing it to me. The answer in most states is YES. Go do it.

This is almost certainly going to result in a stampede of Biden voters trying to change their early votes to Superspreaderman.

Since that's evidently obvious to yourself, Bleyd and others, isn't it also likely to be obvious to Democrats as well? And if it's obvious to them that they will suffer political backlash for trying to do good, are they then to some extent responsible for the backlash?

But I'm not convinced there was a backlash against Obama in 2016. After all, Hillary Clinton did get the second highest vote total in US election history and the republicans did cheat.

FDR is a major exception, as his unprecedented presidency occurred during unprecedented times. While people are naturally resistant to change, the exception to that rule is when the present condition is completely unbearable. Remember what I said about convincing people that they want to change, and they'll welcome you with open arms? FDR took over in a time of crisis where the majority of the nation was already begging for radical change, so they were willing to accept whatever FDR had to offer. By the time FDR left office, his changes had become the new normal, so when his successors largely stuck to his policies, it was no longer implementing change, but maintaining the status quo.

While there are many who are desperate for change now, their is still a large swath of the country who doesn't, or at least doesn't want the kind of change the democrats are promoting. Unlike in FDR's time, they aren't desperate enough to accept anything, they still need to be sold on the changes democrats want.

[17] I think this is a great idea! I think Californians and New Yorkers will agree if SCOTUS returns power to Trump and the GOP. American Democrats certainly won't want to live in a Trump'n'GOP America so if they do intend to leave, it's only fair that they bring land and wealth with them.

[18] Are you trying to make me throw up?

[23] True. You said Friday that Comey did not announce it publicly. You're the only one here who did and no-one else acknowledged that you'd said it. Everyone else is still covering for Jason Chaffetz. I can't imagine why they'd want to protect him given the trouble he caused. Maybe it's because they all hate Hillary Clinton even more than you do. :)

Incidentally, what do you think of Biden's running mate?

My apologies, I did misunderstand what you said and I understand what you're saying in [16] too. However, liberal progress is not always greeted with backlash.

Take the example of the 1930s when Franklin D Roosevelt introduced the New Deal. That was a massively progressive change at the time yet there was no backlash at the polling booth. Roosevelt got a third term, the only president to do so and, when Eisenhower took over from him, he too was re-elected for a second term. Again no backlash for the New Deal which brought enormous change to the country and ushered in the beginnings of a middle class.

Indeed. :)

This lie about Comey - he didn't make any announcement about Clinton in October 2016. In a confidential communique, he reported to the Chairman of the House Oversight Committee as he'd been directed to do. It was the Chairman who broke the rules by publicly revealing the existence of that communique and dramatising what it contained.

But do any of you mention this?

Ah, yeah ... once or twice. ;)

We'll hopefully find out in about a week.

Biden has a much better chance to convince independents and even more moderate conservatives that the democratic party isn't the evil that the republicans have been trying to portray them as. That's going to be super important to make their more progressive policies much more palatable to the whole country going forward.

That is spot on!

And, knowing Biden as I do, there is no one better to set this course for the future.

And, it's even more important now that the Supreme Court is set to make progressive change very difficult that Biden bring along as many Americans as possible - R, D and I - if any progress is to be made on critical issues like healthcare and the climate apocalypse.

I'm hearing a lot of emphasis on wearing face coverings to the exclusion of other critical mitigation measures. That will get a country nowhere, fast with this virus.

Controlling this virus is all about following fundamental public health science, not rocket science, after all.

That was very well said! You have captured the essence of politics and progressive change.

And, it reminds of a favourite Robert Kennedy quote:

Progress is a nice word but, change is its motivator. And, change has its enemies.

Are you on the Trump payroll, perchance? Ha!

How did you get that out of what I said?

Obama was portrayed as a big change, in part because he ran on a platform of change (Hope and Change), and the republicans were able to leverage that into conservative backlash. It's not his fault, it's the challenge that progressive agendas will always face, simply by their nature.

Most people, by nature, fear change, so they are going to be naturally fearful of progressive platforms unless they're slowly and steadily convinced that it's the right thing. The greater and faster the change, or at least perceived change, the more most people will resist and the easier it is for others, like the republicans, to stoke the fear of further change. Republicans did that for practically the entirety of Obama's two terms, which got the conservatives and even many moderates in the country so afraid that they were willing to turn to a conman like Trump to keep them safe.

Liberals too often want their change right away, but they need to remember that not all of the country is liberal, and so many of them will be resistant to that rapid change and can't just be forced to accept it. It's not the democrats' fault that human nature is the way it is, but it is their fault if they refuse to acknowledge these facts. For all their support of science and fact, that's something they often ignore.

You can't force people to be better, they'll reject you on principle. You have to convince them to want to be better, then they'll accept you with open arms.

Now I understand and these are my concerns too.

[13]

Sounds like a good idea to me! Let's start with DC and the territories first.

[14]

I'd rather impeach one or two of them and get rid of them that way. Doubt Dems will have enough of a majority to do it though... unless we can get statehood to DC and at least 4 territories!

what concerns me is that there's generally no paper record of the vote tabulation, and the software is incredibly vulnerable to manipulation - either by outside actors or by the companies who make the machines. i saw hbo's hacking democracy documentary back in 2007, and since then not a whole lot has changed.

JL

So now it's Obama's fault that Trump is in the White House? It constantly amazes me how the Left will twist itself inside out to lay the blame for republican malfeasance at the feet of a Democrat or all elected Democrats.

What is it that you have against Democrats? Why this constant endeavour to make them accountable for every ill? Really, the republicans need do very little when the biggest threat to Democrats comes from the Left eating its own.

I think Biden is the best choice for even the most liberal agenda. Rapid and severe change has a tendency to create backlash. Obama wasn't super liberal, but the perception that he was, combined with his race, felt like a very big shift to a lot of the country, and that created the backlash that got us Trump. Going from Trump to someone as liberal as Sanders would be an even bigger shift, and probably create another conservative backlash.

Biden, on the other hand, is a very moderate democrat. He will be a return to normalcy, which is what the country needs most, but which will also better set the stage for future progress. Biden has a much better chance to convince independents and even more moderate conservatives that the democratic party isn't the evil that the republicans have been trying to portray them as. That's going to be super important to make their more progressive policies much more palatable to the whole country going forward.

Essentially, Sanders might have fought for very progressive policies, and maybe even gotten some of them passed, but odds are the conservative backlash would have torn them all down in short order, and possibly set the progressive cause even further back the way Trump has after all Obama did.

What is it about vote-counting that concerns you?

This lie about Comey - he didn't make any announcement about Clinton in October 2016. In a confidential communique, he reported to the Chairman of the House Oversight Committee as he'd been directed to do. It was the Chairman who broke the rules by publicly revealing the existence of that communique and dramatising what it contained. He was up in front of the House Ethics Committee because of it and chose to resign rather than be thrown out of Congress for what were serious violations of Committee and House rules.

But do any of you mention this? No. For reasons I cannot fathom, you'd all rather protect the republican at fault and blame James Comey in his stead.

Then there's this other zombie lie that refuses to die, the one that falsely claims John Boehner was forced out of Congress by the tea party. Even when confronted with the truth, Americans still prefer the lie. I would've thought the Left would welcome the truth but they don't.

I'm wondering if human beings in every country have the same problem with the truth that Americans do. I guess we must since we're all human beings and this flaw is a human one.

i'm concerned about vote-counting too.

JL

Human beings have this extraordinary ability to blind themselves to inconvenient truths. Even though some of the republican cheaters in NC were caught and charged, there's this persistent belief in the fantasy that America has fair elections. It's pretty much considered unpatriotic to suggest otherwise.

But the fact remains: republicans cheat. Not only in their flagrantly unfair gerrymandering of districts and racial bias in making laws and regulations designed to suppress minority voters, but in out-and-out cheating.

I don't know how many times it's been demonstrated that voting machines and tabulators are easy to manipulate. All evidence that there was 2016 cheating in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Michigan and Florida that put Trump in the White House and gave the GOP a majority in the Senate is ignored. It's this wilful blindness that may well prove to be the final death knell of the republic because it prevents Americans from doing anything about it.

But this lie about US election security is not an outlier. There's that persistent lie about Comey:
Also of note, we are now exactly as far away from Election Day as we were four years ago when James Comey essentially threw the election by announcing there were more Hillary Clinton emails under investigation.

Yeah, as a Bernie supporter myself, I find myself, when attempting to second-guess Biden, saying: "OK, Joe, you seem to know what you're doing and the consensus was you were the safest bet against Trump, so I'll reserve judgement..."

If you know what I mean. Biden's persona seems to have gotten him pretty far, so more power to him, for now.

-CW

Not after Trump gave America:

The worst pandemic since 1918
The worst economy since 1929
The race riots of the late 1960s

...all at one time!

Trump's problem is that Joe Biden was and is the least likely of all of the two dozen Democratic contenders for the nomination to be regarded as some wild-eyed Socialist.
As much as this Bernie Bro was disappointed that Joe prevailed, I do see the wisdom in his selection.