Joe Biden

[belboid]

Joe Biden’s DNC Speech Sounded A Lot Like A Jack Layton Quote

Some lines sounded very similar to the late NDP leader’s last words to Canadians.

www.huffingtonpost.ca

In his final message to Canadians, the late NDP leader Jack Layton promised something quite similar.

“My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world.”

That seems fairly generic, easy to get a dozen variations. Tho he does have form in that area, of course.

 

[petee]

That seems fairly generic, easy to get a dozen variations. Tho he does have form in that area, of course.

yes he does.

 

[belboid]

yes he does.

Neil Kinnock: the Long March to Power

 

[Streathamite]

Trump is really unpopular but he is running against a boring opponent so a lot of people will just not bother turning up, especially in these difficult times.

Agreed with the rest of what you said, but this bit I don't. Trump is one of those presidential candidates about whom it's virtually impossible not to have a strong opinion, which means that thise who are against him don't just dislike him; they are truly appalled and horrified by what he's done as President. Whcih means, an awful lot will feel very strongly motivated just to get him out of office, at all costs. By all thee signs I have seen, that constituency is fired up, and determined.

Even if the other guy is about us uninspiring and unexciting candidate as you can imagine.

 

[Cid]

Agreed with the rest of what you said, but this bit I don't. Trump is one of those presidential candidates about whom it's virtually impossible not to have a strong opinion, which means that thise who are against him don't just dislike him; they are truly appalled and horrified by what he's done as President. Whcih means, an awful lot will feel very strongly motivated just to get him out of office, at all costs. By all thee signs I have seen, that constituency is fired up, and determined.

Even if the other guy is about us uninspiring and unexciting candidate as you can imagine.

Yeah, this... The most fundamental of rights people have fought for at risk. Especially given the way the US political/judicial systems work. Hence vote for brick.

 

[freakydave]

Agreed with the rest of what you said, but this bit I don't. Trump is one of those presidential candidates about whom it's virtually impossible not to have a strong opinion, which means that thise who are against him don't just dislike him; they are truly appalled and horrified by what he's done as President. Whcih means, an awful lot will feel very strongly motivated just to get him out of office, at all costs. By all thee signs I have seen, that constituency is fired up, and determined.

Even if the other guy is about us uninspiring and unexciting candidate as you can imagine.

Maybe, but it was ridiculous that he won the election in 2016. I always try to armour myself in cyinicism before an election and it never works

 

[Streathamite]

Maybe, but it was ridiculous that he won the election in 2016. I always try to armour myself in cyinicism before an election and it never works

Sure, but that's as much because Hilary made as big a fuck up of her strategy as is humanly posible, as anything esle. She blew it.
Fortunately, they seem to have just about learnt the lessons from that.

 

[freakydave]

Sure, but that's as much because Hilary made as big a fuck up of her strategy as is humanly posible, as anything esle. She blew it.
Fortunately, they seem to have just about learnt the lessons from that.

I disagree, I think that Trump was just better than Clinton. You of course have to compare it to Sanders, they are both old guy who have been senators their whole life, Sanders managed to turn Democratic Socialism into a thing,

 

[Streathamite]

I disagree, I think that Trump was just better than Clinton. You of course have to compare it to Sanders, they are both old guy who have been senators their whole life, Sanders managed to turn Democratic Socialism into a thing,

OK....this is what I meant by 'Hillary fucked it up'.

Right from the start of his campaign, Trump's game plan was obvious and upfront. He was going to win - both the Primary and the general, by a coalition consisting of Southern racists, xenophobes and conservatives - hence his 15 solid months of dogwhistles to them - the rural, farmer western/northwestern states, and the most important group of all, the mostly (but not solely) white bluecollar classes in the rustbelt, the o;ld industrial midwest. You win those three groups over, you win all those states, and you're President.

This meant Hillary, as the dem front-runner throughout, has 15 solid months to create a strategy to counter that, and given the key group were in the rustbelt, it really shouldn't have been that hard to convince them that any candidate from the party of organised Labour is more on their side than a billionaire property developer from NYC. Especially given that HRC was from the, uh, midwest. Ditto, where Obama built his entire political career.

She totally, utterly failed to do that, despite the fact she so obviously needed to do that. Even in the last 2 weeks of the campaign, when Trump's people were absolutely blitzing those states, she didn't visit them once. She spent the whole of that fortnight whooping it up in California with her millionaire tech guru bezzie mates. Tim Kaine, aWest virginaian, visited the rust belt once in that whole time.

Menawhile, Trum p aimed his nativist, protectionist, anti-globalist MAGA message right at the heart of people who had been screwed most by neoliberalism, globalisation and jobs going overseas.

so - surprise! - he won in Michigan, pennsylvania and Wisconsin, all by a hair'sbreadth, and that got him the Presidency, despite HRC winning the popular vote. by nearly 3 million votes.

Conclusion; she fucked it up.

I would also argue that if you win the popular vote and still lose the Presidency, then the only conclusion to draw is that the 270-EC starategy was wrong.
e2a: edited to correct typoes, punctuation etc and to add clarity

 

[freakydave]

OK....this is what I meant by 'Hillary fucked it up'.

Right from the start of his campaign, Trump's game plan was obvious and upfront. He was going to win - both the Primary and the general, by a coalition consisting of Southern racists, xenophobes and conservatives - hence his 15 solid months of dogwhistles to them - the rural, farmer western/northwestern states, and the most important group of all, the mostly (but not solely) white bluecollar classes in the rustbelt, the o;ld industrial midwest. You win those three groups over, you win all those states, and you're President.

This meant Hillary, as the dem front-runner throughout, has 15 solid months to create a strategy to counter that, and given the key group were in the rustbelt, it really shouldn't have been that hard to convince them that any candidate from the party of organised Labour is more on their side than a billionaire property developer from NYC. Especially given that HRC was from the, uh, midwest. Ditto, where Obama built his entire political career.

She totally, utterly failed to do that, despite the fact she so obviously needed to do that. Even in the last 2 weeks of the campaign, when Trump's people were absolutely blitzing those states, she didn't visit them once. She spent the whole of that fortnight whooping it up in California with her millionaire tech guru bezzie mates. Tim Kaine, aWest virginaian, visited the rust belt once in that whole time.

Menawhile, Trum p aimed his nativist, protectionist, anti-globalist MAGA message right at the heart of people who had been screwed most by neoliberalism, globalisation and jobs going overseas.

so - surprise! - he won in Michigan, pennsylvania and Wisconsin, all by a hair'sbreadth, and that got him the Presidency, despite HRC winning the popular vote. by nearly 3 million votes.

Conclusion; she fucked it up.

I would also argue that if you win the popular vote and still lose the Presidency, then the only conclusion to draw is that the 270-EC starategy was wrong.
e2a: edited to correct typoes, punctuation etc and to add clarity

I mean, what you are saying is that Hillary Clinton is thick as shit and has no charisma.
I think that Joe Biden is also thick as shit and has a +1 charisma score

I don't think it's going to come down to the minutae of strategy, it is going to come down to Donald Trump and if people want to re elect him. It is stupid to depend on Trump for anything, including him losing.

 

[Streathamite]

I mean, what you are saying is that Hillary Clinton is thick as shit and has no charisma.

I'm not saying that at all. By near-universal consensus of just about everyone who has ever had dealings with HRC, she is smart as fuck, and showed an awesome grasp of complex p[olicy issues, both as Forst Lady, Senator, Sec Of State and candidate. She just badly misread the situation, and the mood in those states, in 2016.

Biden is nowhere near as smart.

But he has one advantage; he is an old-fashioned democrat/Tammany Hall street pol, with roots in that community (bluecollar midwest/rustbelt) he's always kept. He's always been very good at speaking to that bluecollar bloc. Hence, he got the nomination. And he's got the example of where HRC got it so badly wrong, to learn from.

So, I think, he'll probably get it right. However, the general campaign has only just started, so god knows what will happen between now and November.

Plus, also, Trump didn't have to explain away 160,000 deaths and a full-on economic catastrophe, last time. He didn't have to run on a record. Now, he does.

 

[Streathamite]

I would also add to this; in 2016, the Dem machine as a whole were appallingly overconfident, and complacent. At heart, they acted like the American people wouldn't, couldn't do something as batshit crazy as vote Trump in (echoes of the Remain campaign in the EU referendum).
They were wrong.

 

[Streathamite]

I don't think it's going to come down to the minutae of strategy,

Well, it does. Because Trump won by a whisker in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. If they flip those - the game's pretty much over. If they flip Florida as well (where just aboutn every latino voter is currently spitting at pictures of Trump), it really is a done deal.
That's a tiny number of voters, they need to flip.. c. 205,000, in a nation with a population of 330 million.
Hence, strategy.

 

[freakydave]

My point is that it shouldn't even be a thing. It's a bit like how you can't blame Germany for Hitler. The problem is that it's a thing, we all have Obama to compare it to, there are criticisms of him, he was very corporate and his idea of 'pivot to Asia' was naive and cynical etc.. I find that geeky but interesting, the fact that Donald Trump the professional twat is president of the USA is just horrible and rubbish.
I put that in the category of 'Japan has been locked into a corrupt conservative government for a decade' or 'Brazil seems to have really regressed since Bolsanaro took over'
USA is just one of those countries now, them and China apparently have all of the money, but they are also apparently poor countries. Why get upset about it?

 

[Streathamite]

My point is that it shouldn't even be a thing. It's a bit like how you can't blame Germany for Hitler. The problem is that it's a thing, we all have Obama to compare it to, there are criticisms of him, he was very corporate and his idea of 'pivot to Asia' was naive and cynical etc.. I find that geeky but interesting, the fact that Donald Trump the professional twat is president of the USA is just horrible and rubbish.
I put that in the category of 'Japan has been locked into a corrupt conservative government for a decade' or 'Brazil seems to have really regressed since Bolsanaro took over'
USA is just one of those countries now, them and China apparently have all of the money, but they are also apparently poor countries. Why get upset about it?

I honstly don't get the point you're making here. Please expand and elaborate?

 

[krtek a houby]

My point is that it shouldn't even be a thing. It's a bit like how you can't blame Germany for Hitler. The problem is that it's a thing, we all have Obama to compare it to, there are criticisms of him, he was very corporate and his idea of 'pivot to Asia' was naive and cynical etc.. I find that geeky but interesting, the fact that Donald Trump the professional twat is president of the USA is just horrible and rubbish.
I put that in the category of 'Japan has been locked into a corrupt conservative government for a decade' or 'Brazil seems to have really regressed since Bolsanaro took over'
USA is just one of those countries now, them and China apparently have all of the money, but they are also apparently poor countries. Why get upset about it?

More than a decade, with the LDP, in Japan. Apart from a brief period for a couple of years they've been in power for around 60 years.

As for the others, why not get upset about it?

 

[freakydave]

I honstly don't get the point you're making here. Please expand and elaborate?

I am drunk and cant explain but I will try lol


Trump is not the cause of America being shit, he is the symptom. You are going into stats and so on about how Biden should beat Trump because the DNC will use a better strategy, but it's past that. Just the fact that we are taking Donald Trump seriously means that we lost. It's a bit like getting upset about the Chinese government. Chairman Xi did address the corruption that was rife under Chairman Hu, but he has created a new class of corruption and his love of Chairman Mao has made himan unsuccessful chairman....

Because we are not in love with China it's just the CCP doing their thing

 

[freakydave]

More than a decade, with the LDP, in Japan. Apart from a brief period for a couple of years they've been in power for around 60 years.

As for the others, why not get upset about it?

Why not get upset about it? because the alternative is being upset

 

[Streathamite]

I am drunk and cant explain but I will try lol


Trump is not the cause of America being shit, he is the symptom. You are going into stats and so on about how Biden should beat Trump because the DNC will use a better strategy, but it's past that. Just the fact that we are taking Donald Trump seriously means that we lost. It's a bit like getting upset about the Chinese government. Chairman Xi did address the corruption that was rife under Chairman Hu, but he has created a new class of corruption and his love of Chairman Mao has made himan unsuccessful chairman....

Because we are not in love with China it's just the CCP doing their thing

Yeah, fair enough. Sure, we lost - in 2016. And in Britain, for all of the past decade. Doesn't mean we accept that as a final status quo.

 

[freakydave]

Yeah, fair enough. Sure, we lost - in 2016. And in Britain, for all of the past decade. Doesn't mean we accept that as a final status quo.

But I think that we are going to keep losing if we pretend Joe Biden isn't a defeat as well

To be incredibly over dramatic and facile, it's like how everyone put up with Hitler in the 30s. It would have made sense at the time, the idea of starting a war with another superpower was disgusting because everyone had lived through how that went, so you keep on accepting stuff because who are we to put the world to rights?

Personally I have never voted because I always found the people who I was meant to vote for boring, I do follow elections and get upset or happy who wins, but it doesn't connect with me to my vote, it always seems like the person who is going to win is going to win whether I vote or not. I do regret not voting on Brexit because that was close

 

[PTK]

But I think that we are going to keep losing if we pretend Joe Biden isn't a defeat as well

To be incredibly over dramatic and facile, it's like how everyone put up with Hitler in the 30s. It would have made sense at the time, the idea of starting a war with another superpower was disgusting because everyone had lived through how that went, so you keep on accepting stuff because who are we to put the world to rights?

Personally I have never voted because I always found the people who I was meant to vote for boring, I do follow elections and get upset or happy who wins, but it doesn't connect with me to my vote, it always seems like the person who is going to win is going to win whether I vote or not. I do regret not voting on Brexit because that was close

I think that you should have voted in the 2019 General Election, because a Labour government would have implemented a material improvement in the lives of the poorest people in the country within months. I refer to people who depend on social security benefits. This would have exerted an upward pressure on wages, to the benefit of those on low pay. A Labour government under Corbyn would also have repealed anti-strike legislation, making it easier for workers to take action to defend their interests. Thus it would have improved the strategic position of the working class. Furthetmore, a Corbyn government would have inplemented a significant increase in spending on the NHS and acted to end the privatisation of NHS services.

 

[freakydave]

I think that you should have voted in the 2019 General Election, because a Labour government would have implemented a material improvement in the lives of the poorest people in the country within months. I refer to people who depend on social security benefits. This would have exerted an upward pressure on wages, to the benefit of those on low pay. A Labour government under Corbyn would also have repealed anti-strike legislation, making it easier for workers to take action to defend their interests. Thus it would have improved the strategic position of the working class. Furthetmore, a Corbyn government would have inplemented a significant increase in spending on the NHS and acted to end the privatisation of NHS services.

But Labour lost by a landslide because the entire establishment including the Labour establishment turned on him and created this 'antisemitism on the left' scandal which may be and probably is a thing, but it was a thing in the run up to the election for an obvious reason, and plus, Jeremy Corbyn is just not charismatic. I'd love to sit down with him and discuss stuff, but he would never in a million years beat someone like Boris Johnson in an election.

 

[PTK]

But Labour lost by a landslide because the entire establishment including the Labour establishment turned on him and created this 'antisemitism on the left' scandal which may be and probably is a thing, but it was a thing in the run up to the election for an obvious reason, and plus, Jeremy Corbyn is just not charismatic. I'd love to sit down with him and discuss stuff, but he would never in a million years beat someone like Boris Johnson in an election.

In 2017, Corbyn achieved the biggest swing to Labour since 1945. In 2019, it was Brexit wot lost it. The second referendum policy was massively unpopular. Corbyn may not be the best public speaker in the world, but he addressed the largest poltical rallies in this county for about 50 years. No-one else managed to attract anywhere near the number of people that attended his rallies.

If people of good will such as your good self had supported Labour in 2017, it may have won. It was only about 3,000 votes shy of winning the most seats.

 

[freakydave]

In 2017, Corbyn achieved the biggest swing to Labour since 1945. In 2019, it was Brexit wot lost it. The second referendum policy was massively unpopular. Corbyn may not be the best public speaker in the world, but he addressed the largest poltical rallies in this county for about 50 years. No-one else managed to attract anywhere near the number of people that attended his rallies.

If people of good will such as your good self had supported Labour in 2017, it may have won. It was only about 3,000 votes shy of winning the most seats.

Well I would contend that Jeremy Corbyn was an avatar for something that is being frustrated by current voting systems but has not gone away at all. The reason that Jeremy Corbyn was trounced by Boris Johnson and that Bernie Sanders was never ever going to be president of the USA is not the electorate it's the system. If Corbyn had won the election in 2017 (which I don't think was ever going to happen) then he would have been a Theresa May kind of failure, the Labour Party would have hung him out to dry and we would have had the same 2019 humiliation
The left always seem to try to appeal to empathy and optimism, which is not a bad thing, but that is not the actual problem that politics is meant to address. The problem with the British government right now is not that we are a rich country with an amazing culture that travels around the world and our government is heartless, it is that all of the government come from expensive private schools and hook up at expensive universities and that seems to be a selection process so we are choosing leaders from a pool of a few thousand instead of the millions who live here.

 

[freakydave]

I came for the empathy and optimism, I stayed because of the cynicism and analysis

 

[Streathamite]

The second referendum policy was massively unpopular. Corbyn may not be the best public speaker in the world, but he addressed the largest poltical rallies in this county for about 50 years.

Precisely. And the person responsible for that?
Sir Keir Starmer.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

 

[krtek a houby]

But Labour lost by a landslide because the entire establishment including the Labour establishment turned on him and created this 'antisemitism on the left' scandal which may be and probably is a thing, but it was a thing in the run up to the election for an obvious reason, and plus, Jeremy Corbyn is just not charismatic. I'd love to sit down with him and discuss stuff, but he would never in a million years beat someone like Boris Johnson in an election.

Do you think that there is a problem with anti-Semitism in the Labour Party or not?

 

[freakydave]

Do you think that there is a problem with anti-Semitism in the Labour Party or not?

I have no idea, I would imagine that like every institution there is a tradition of tolerating racism because most people who are not a minority don't understand it. I wouldn't imagine that it is a thing that is particular to Labour although that may be me failing to understand the Labour Party.
I think that the way that it was made into a big scandal in the run up to the election last winter was incredibly cynical and was not done out of concern for the issue of anti semitism in the Labour Party.
I have heard criticisms of the Labour left allying with some very scummy groups over sectarian issues in Ireland and the Middle East, but to address that in the run up to an election, against Boris Johnson who is for all of his act as a 'silly man' one of the most dangerous and heartless prime ministers in living memory was disgusting for me.

 

[krtek a houby]

I have no idea, I would imagine that like every institution there is a tradition of tolerating racism because most people who are not a minority don't understand it. I wouldn't imagine that it is a thing that is particular to Labour although that may be me failing to understand the Labour Party.
I think that the way that it was made into a big scandal in the run up to the election last winter was incredibly cynical and was not done out of concern for the issue of anti semitism in the Labour Party.
I have heard criticisms of the Labour left allying with some very scummy groups over sectarian issues in Ireland and the Middle East, but to address that in the run up to an election, against Boris Johnson who is for all of his act as a 'silly man' one of the most dangerous and heartless prime ministers in living memory was disgusting for me.

Which "scummy" groups concerning Ireland are you referring to?