President Joe Biden

[Bigga]

I know, you do it all the time on here. In fact, it’s your stock in trade.

I have better things to do with a glorious 21C, full sunshine, Sunday afternoon, so enjoy your self flagellation, while I enjoy the rest of my day.

Yes, enjoy and when you're out there think about what I said that was non-factual.

Toodle pip.

 

[cjn]

Late to the (pretty hilarious) discussion in this thread, but thats a great ad.

 

[buckshot]

I've proudly voted for every Democratic nominee since I was 18. I never once felt like I was choosing the lesser of two evils, they've all been the better person. When I vote for Joe Biden in November my streak will continue.

 

[SWP's back]

Let me ask you; do you think Biden is bulletproof from protest, should he get in?

No, once he’s number #46 then it’s back to normal life pre 2016.

It’s like supporting Spurs in a game against United where United have to win to gain the last CL space. Now I really don’t like Spurs but that 90 minutes I’ll be supporting them.

Having said that, I have no animosity towards Biden, he’s just about 15 years too old for the role but he’s 1,000 times better than Trump.

Have you seen Trump just signed an order to do away with Obama era protections for LGBT patients.



You can’t tell me the two have the same policies.

 

[SWP's back]

As we thought. A great ad.

 

[Bigga]

No, once he’s number #46 then it’s back to normal life pre 2016.

It’s like supporting Spurs in a game against United where United have to win to gain the last CL space. Now I really don’t like Spurs but that 90 minutes I’ll be supporting them.

Having said that, I have no animosity towards Biden, he’s just about 15 years too old for the role but he’s 1,000 times better than Trump.

Have you seen Trump just signed an order to do away with Obama era protections for LGBT patients.



You can’t tell me the two have the same policies.

Second point, first. Let's not pretend that Obama has always been supportive of the LGBTQ+ community, he hasn't. That said, #45 has always been looking for a reason to repeal anything to do with them as he started this with within the army and navy divisions. It was to be expected it wasn't over.

And so the first point.

This is something I've been saying for a LONG TIME and yet there is steadfast refusal to acknowledge what has been said. Pre-2016 conditions, with neoliberal Democratic oversight, is how #45 got into power in the first place!

Why do you think I asked you, yesterday(?), if you thought Biden was bulletproof from protest?

All the older gen of the Dem and Repubs are actively saying 'no de-funding of the police', but more money to reform it!?! It's like they purposefully miss the point on de-funding. The honeymoon for Biden will be short, if he refuses to be more Progressive in thought and action.

Not that you guys 'give a fuck about what progressives want', but all those calls for de-funding the police and fund other social needs are Progressive in thought and demand.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Second point, first. Let's not pretend that Obama has always been supportive of the LGBTQ+ community, he hasn't. That said, #45 has always been looking for a reason to repeal anything to do with them as he started this with within the army and navy divisions. It was to be expected it wasn't over.

And so the first point.

This is something I've been saying for a LONG TIME and yet there is steadfast refusal to acknowledge what has been said. Pre-2016 conditions, with neoliberal Democratic oversight, is how #45 got into power in the first place!

Why do you think I asked you, yesterday(?), if you thought Biden was bulletproof from protest?

All the older gen of the Dem and Repubs are actively saying 'no de-funding of the police', but more money to reform it!?! It's like they purposefully miss the point on de-funding. The honeymoon for Biden will be short, if he refuses to be more Progressive in thought and action.

Not that you guys 'give a fuck about what progressives want', but all those calls for de-funding the police and fund other social needs are Progressive in thought and demand.

Biden's 'honeymoon period' will be largely dependent on the Democratic majority in the House and Senate. Having said that, it will also depend on wider support from big business and rich donors.

No way on Earth that Biden will be allowed to be too progressive if his policies don't meet the big business criteria (bottom line profit and shareholder dividends).

That'll be the same whoever gets voted in.

 

[cjn]

Second point, first. Let's not pretend that Obama has always been supportive of the LGBTQ+ community, he hasn't. That said, #45 has always been looking for a reason to repeal anything to do with them as he started this with within the army and navy divisions. It was to be expected it wasn't over.

And so the first point.

This is something I've been saying for a LONG TIME and yet there is steadfast refusal to acknowledge what has been said. Pre-2016 conditions, with neoliberal Democratic oversight, is how #45 got into power in the first place!

Why do you think I asked you, yesterday(?), if you thought Biden was bulletproof from protest?

All the older gen of the Dem and Repubs are actively saying 'no de-funding of the police', but more money to reform it!?! It's like they purposefully miss the point on de-funding. The honeymoon for Biden will be short, if he refuses to be more Progressive in thought and action.

Not that you guys 'give a fuck about what progressives want', but all those calls for de-funding the police and fund other social needs are Progressive in thought and demand.

You're getting all worked up over saying the phrase "defund the police", which polls very poorly and doesn't mean anything concrete anyway. Ask five activists and you get five different definitions what they actually mean by defund. Meanwhile, huge majorities are for reforming the police in various ways, including 60-70% majorities for police union reform and eliminating stuff like chokeholds and qualified immunity - things which common sense would tell you are hugely beneficial. Now why the fuck would we campaign on the first thing, when we can campaign on the second? We're trying to win elections here.

 

[Bigga]

Biden's 'honeymoon period' will be largely dependent on the Democratic majority in the House and Senate. Having said that, it will also depend on wider support from big business and rich donors.

No way on Earth that Biden will be allowed to be too progressive if his policies don't meet the big business criteria (bottom line profit and shareholder dividends).

That'll be the same whoever gets voted in.

It will just lead to a class war, then.

 

[Bigga]

You're getting all worked up over saying the phrase "defund the police", which polls very poorly and doesn't mean anything concrete anyway. Ask five activists and you get five different definitions what they actually mean by defund. Meanwhile, huge majorities are for reforming the police in various ways, including 60-70% majorities for police union reform and eliminating stuff like chokeholds and qualified immunity - things which common sense would tell you are hugely beneficial. Now why the fuck would we campaign on the first thing, when we can campaign on the second? We're trying to win elections here.

Chokeholds are being processed now. Nowt to do with the Dems.

Qualified immunity will be restricted, which is a nonsense.

And most 'activists' want that extra funding for their neighbourhoods, such as hospitals and mental health and others.

When you ask the older gen about 'de-funding', they will think it means getting rid of the police or making it smaller.

That's not the intention.

It's noted that 'de-fund' doesn't strike the right terminology for some.