Godspeed, Joe Biden

[NatMorton]

Well, I for one, and despite strong policy differences with the President-elect, wish Joe Biden well. I hope he finds it in him to govern from the center. One can argue we need that more now than at any time since the Reconstruction Era.

 

[MrPeanut]

Well, I for one, and despite strong policy differences with the President-elect, wish Joe Biden well. I hope he finds it in him to govern from the center. One can argue we need that more now than at any time since the Reconstruction Era.

Why would you argue that?

 

[NatMorton]

Why would you argue that?

Because in my estimation as a nation we are losing our ability to solve problems.

 

[MrPeanut]

Because in my estimation as a nation we are losing our ability to solve problems.

I agree with you there, but I'm not sure what it has to do with governing from the center.

 

[Mr Person]

Well, I for one, and despite strong policy differences with the President-elect, wish Joe Biden well. I hope he finds it in him to govern from the center. One can argue we need that more now than at any time since the Reconstruction Era.

Get on the phone to McConnell. He's already been jawing about how this is going to be Obama 2.0 for the GOP. . .

But I'll take gridlock without spastic idiocy and malevolence over the last four years any day.

 

[Craig234]

Well, I for one, and despite strong policy differences with the President-elect, wish Joe Biden well. I hope he finds it in him to govern from the center. One can argue we need that more now than at any time since the Reconstruction Era.

First, thanks for a positive, civil, comment. But - why do you prefer the so-called "center" - we need a better, more accurate name for it - to the real traditional pro-American, progressive policies and values, as represented by FDR, JFK, and Bernie? Be specific, not platitudes, and if the word "socialism" is in your position, please ignore my question.

 

[NatMorton]

First, thanks for a positive, civil, comment. But - why do you prefer the so-called "center" - we need a better, more accurate name for it - to the real traditional pro-American, progressive policies and values, as represented by FDR, JFK, and Bernie? Be specific, not platitudes, and if the word "socialism" is in your position, please ignore my question.

I find the policies of self-styled Social Democrats (close, but I didn't violate your terms) to be both extreme and foolish. Facilitating the policies of Sanders, Warren, and "The Squad" would, in my estimation, not be leading from the center. It would be a charge from the left.

 

[NatMorton]

Get on the phone to McConnell. He's already been jawing about how this is going to be Obama 2.0 for the GOP. . .

But I'll take gridlock without spastic idiocy and malevolence over the last four years any day.

I'm mostly okay with gridlock, too, and would certainly prefer it to the scenario I describe in the post above.

 

[Craig234]

I find the policies of self-styled Social Democrats (close, but I didn't violate your terms) to be both extreme and foolish. Facilitating the policies of Sanders, Warren, and "The Squad" would, in my estimation, not be leading from the center. It would be a charge from the left.

Thanks and I have no issue with your choice of terms, but you did violate my request to be specific instead of platitudes. Saying their polices are bad is the opposite of what I asked for. Make actual arguments, for example, I could say, "Among its many harms, plutocracy reduces growth and wealth, and diverts much of our wealth to protecting the few at the top, reducing wealth for nearly everyone - currently reducing the average salary an estimated $42,000".

 

[NatMorton]

Thanks and I have no issue with your choice of terms, but you did violate my request to be specific instead of platitudes. Saying their polices are bad is the opposite of what I asked for. Make actual arguments, for example, I could say, "Among its many harms, plutocracy reduces growth and wealth, and diverts much of our wealth to protecting the few at the top, reducing wealth for nearly everyone - currently reducing the average salary an estimated $42,000".

I would, but a debate on the wisdom of the Green New Deal, jacking up tax rates, judicial activism, and ever expanding welfare state would not really be consistent with the OP. If there's a particular one of those you'd like to discuss, by all means start a thread or point me to an existing one. I'll be happy to describe why any one of those policies is ultimately destructive.

 

[Rogue Valley]

I think Democrats are going to have to conduct a serious post-election autopsy and pin-down exactly what Americans want most from a Biden government.

Leaving Trump out of the immediate equation, why did Americans vote for Biden, and why did Americans not vote for Biden.

Why did the Democrats falter on the down-ballot vote?

 

[Craig234]

I would, but a debate on the wisdom of the Green New Deal, jacking up tax rates, judicial activism, and ever expanding welfare state would not really be consistent with the OP. If there's a particular one of those you'd like to discuss, by all means start a thread or point me to an existing one. I'll be happy to describe why any one of those policies is ultimately destructive.

Well, I'm not sure there's a lot more discussion on the OP, leaving room for the part of it preferring centrism/corporatism/plutocracy.

Green New Deal: Addressing the threat to the climate, the need for better, renewable energy, and creating millions of badly needed jobs to do so. There is no downside. It has a large cost, but a lot less than NOT having it.

You can't just use a phrase like 'jacking up tax rates'. That's nearly as bad as "using money" in its vagueness. Changing WHAT taxes on WHOM HOW MUCH, and using them for WHAT? Do you begin to understand the 50-year history of radical right-wing policies undertaxing the rich leading us to our massive debt, income inequality, and lack of public interest spending?

"Judicial activism" is close to "socialism" as a red herring, delusional paranoid propagandistic phrase. Republicans are the judicial activists in a bad sense. Again, you lack any specific information, just throwing out a straw man phrase.

"Welfare state" is another nice buzzword, which has nothing to do with the actual situation, and ignores the situation such as record inequality. It's nothing but a bogeyman to shut down discussion.

 

[Craig234]

I think Democrats are going to have to conduct a serious post-election autopsy and pin-down exactly what Americans want most from a Biden government.

Leaving Trump out of the immediate equation, why did Americans vote for Biden, and why did Americans not vote for Biden.

Why did the Democrats falter on the down-ballot vote?

Your well-meaning comment might be quite wrong. It's like when James Bond asked Blofeld, what do you want, and Blofeld said, I want you to die, Mr. Bond. When the Republicans are cult members, as they are, there are no reasonable, feasible answers to the question, what could Biden do to make them happy. We have to start with their radicalization, before we can get to your question. We might simply have to defeat them in elections.

 

[NatMorton]

I think Democrats are going to have to conduct a serious post-election autopsy and pin-down exactly what Americans want most from a Biden government.

Leaving Trump out of the immediate equation, why did Americans vote for Biden, and why did Americans not vote for Biden.

Why did the Democrats falter on the down-ballot vote?

It will be less about what Americans will want and more about how they will vote in 2022. It is customary for the party that wins the White House to suffer losses in the Congressional elections two years later. The Democrats have an advantage in 2022 as more GOP senators are up for re-election, but for the Democrats the House is already trending in the wrong direction. Also keep in mind that Republicans control far more state governments than the Democrats do, and post-2020-census redistricting is at hand.

IMO, if Biden lets the Progressives in his camp lead the way the Democrats will get slaughtered in 2022, as they did in 2010 after the left-wing ran loose for during the two years of the Obama administration.

 

[Phys251]

Well, I for one, and despite strong policy differences with the President-elect, wish Joe Biden well. I hope he finds it in him to govern from the center. One can argue we need that more now than at any time since the Reconstruction Era.

Thank you.

No doubt there are going to be a lot of political fights on Capitol Hill, especially if the GOP holds the Senate.

But finally, after four long, painful years, we will return to having a President who wants to work even with those with whom he disagrees. We will return to having a President who wants to put fires out, not start them.

There are still some decent Republicans left. We will need not just their votes, but their work. I'm looking forward to giving it a chance, even if it is just a chance.

 

[NatMorton]

Well, I'm not sure there's a lot more discussion on the OP, leaving room for the part of it preferring centrism/corporatism/plutocracy.

Green New Deal: Addressing the threat to the climate, the need for better, renewable energy, and creating millions of badly needed jobs to do so. There is no downside. It has a large cost, but a lot less than NOT having it.

You can't just use a phrase like 'jacking up tax rates'. That's nearly as bad as "using money" in its vagueness. Changing WHAT taxes on WHOM HOW MUCH, and using them for WHAT? Do you begin to understand the 50-year history of radical right-wing policies undertaxing the rich leading us to our massive debt, income inequality, and lack of public interest spending?

"Judicial activism" is close to "socialism" as a red herring, delusional paranoid propagandistic phrase. Republicans are the judicial activists in a bad sense. Again, you lack any specific information, just throwing out a straw man phrase.

"Welfare state" is another nice buzzword, which has nothing to do with the actual situation, and ignores the situation such as record inequality. It's nothing but a bogeyman to shut down discussion.

You are certainly welcome to your opinion, but those programs and those policies are, IMO, unlikely to achieve the objectives that you seek.

 

[Craig234]

IMO, if Biden lets the Progressives in his camp lead the way the Democrats will get slaughtered in 2022, as they did in 2010 after the left-wing ran loose for during the two years of the Obama administration.

Please say hello to Alice for me, since you're both in Wonderland. Nearly the only 'progressive' thing Obama did was the very basic policy of a small start on improving healthcare with the ACA, adopting a Heritage Foundation, right-wing Republican policy. There is a reason Bernie called for a progressive primary opponent for Obama in 2012, so that progressive positions got some discussion in the election. The left isn't why Republicans won in 2010.

 

[NatMorton]

But finally, after four long, painful years, we will return to having a President who wants to work even with those with whom he disagrees

Ah, but will he? To do what you describe here will require compromise, and then as sure as the coming dawn Biden will have to withstand a barrage of "traitor!" invective from his left flank the moment there's even a whiff of him giving a concession to the likes of Sen. McConnell.

 

[NatMorton]

Please say hello to Alice for me, since you're both in Wonderland. Nearly the only 'progressive' thing Obama did was the very basic policy of a small start on improving healthcare with the ACA, adopting a Heritage Foundation, right-wing Republican policy.

Interesting. Whom do you think the 2010 elections swept into power, elected officials even more committed to "progressive things?"

 

[Phys251]

Ah, but will he? To do what you describe here will require compromise, and then as sure as the coming dawn Biden will have to withstand a barrage of "traitor!" invective from his left flank the moment there's even a whiff of him giving a concession to the likes of Sen. McConnell.

No doubt the party will be short. We expect that. Such it is when the two sides are so far apart and when there is such a, shall we say, variety of opinions within the Democratic base.

Put simply, I am setting my expectations low for legislative progress but high for a return to sanity. Four years of insanity is more than enough.

 

[Craig234]

Interesting. Whom do you think the 2010 elections swept into power, elected officials even more committed to "progressive things?"

See my edited updated post. Republicans were successful in 2010 not because of any problems with 'the left', but because they have a powerful and very well funded propaganda machine that generated a huge backlash to the ACA even while the public agreed with the actual policies in it. They just were misled to hate "Obamacare" by its name, and were radicalized to action, and they voted. Your claim of left-wing policies is a fantasy.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I find the policies of self-styled Social Democrats (close, but I didn't violate your terms) to be both extreme and foolish. Facilitating the policies of Sanders, Warren, and "The Squad" would, in my estimation, not be leading from the center. It would be a charge from the left.

How about if it's more like FDR?

 

[Helix]

he's one of the few remaining 80s Democrats in a leadership position. while i doubt that a Reagan / O'Neill dynamic is possible, i suppose we'll see how it plays out.

 

[Craig234]

Ah, but will he? To do what you describe here will require compromise, and then as sure as the coming dawn Biden will have to withstand a barrage of "traitor!" invective from his left flank the moment there's even a whiff of him giving a concession to the likes of Sen. McConnell.

McConnell called wanting to talk compromise with you. He said he wants to kill your pets and children, burn down your house, poison and torture you, and take your spouse for his own perverse pleasure. Which should I tell him you are ready to compromise on first?

 

[Craig234]

How about if it's more like FDR?

Which it is.