he has a slight advantage over H Clinton because he has not been bashed non stop since 1992 when Bill was elected. But he will certainly get bashed now.
He’s also not Hillary in the aspect of the hatred she received from so many, for various reasons, most as a result of a 25-30 year smear campaign.
ETA: Like Bijou Drains said.
And thankfully, it’s not the case that the Democratic establishment are rallying behind Biden with anything like the unanimity they displayed for Clinton. Yes, he’s leading the 538 “endorsement tracker”, but with only 75 points. Hillary was well over 200 at this point last cycle. Most of the Democratic establishment seems to have learned their lesson about unifying behind a candidate before the actual voters have had their chance to weigh in. Amusingly, the candidate currently leading in endorsements by DNC members is… Bernie Sanders!
My point is that Trump’s 2000 run was serious enough that he jumped through several of the process hoops before dropping out-- formed an exploratory committee and ran a campaign in several states, etc. So Trump really does NOT have a valid ‘the first time I ran, I won’ claim (though of course that won’t stop him lying about it).
Good point, and a good counter to the ‘Biden is exactly the same as Hillary’ arguments.
Why? It’s not like an exhaustive oppo report was part of his last campaign. Lyin’ Ted, Li"l Marco, low energy Bush and Crooked Hillary didn’t get their nicknames from their record.
I’d vote for Bo Biden before I voted for Trump.
Stay classy, gato.
He will get bashed. And don’t forget that despite that long smear effort against her HRC started the cycle with strong approval ratings (from her Obama service days) but dropped during the course of the primaries and general.
He is not inevitable. Just the current one to beat.
Biden has been 100% in the bag for banks his entire career. It may be it is impossible to get a politician from Delaware who isn’t. Regardless, that alone should make him a no-go for a democratic candidate today.
I do not think Obama was the same when he ran although his administration certainly became a protector of banks. Was that Biden’s influence? I have no idea. Either way it is a blight on Obama’s presidency (and I mean things like giving HSBC a pass on major criminal actions from the bank).
And the reason for that 25-30 year hate campaign was that Hillary Clinton dared to be ambitious. The conservatives - even moderates in her own party - had contempt toward her for not knowing her own place. Keep in mind she had more to do with putting healthcare reform into the public consciousness for an entire generation of people than anyone, including Obama and including Bernie Sanders. They were both late-comers to the party. Hillary Clinton’s progressive ideals and female ambition were the reasons that Democrats lost control of the congress after 40 years.
And that crime bill she “supported”? She wasn’t in the congress then. She didn’t vote for it. But guess what? Bernie Sanders was in congress - and he DID vote for it.
I haven’t read it, but apparently Warren’s campaign bio is very critical of what she perceived as Biden’s pro-banking influence in the Obama administration’s discussions of how to handle the financial crisis. Look for this to come up in the debates.
:dubious:
You must really hate the idea of an ambitious black woman running for president.
No, I don’t, but I’m pointing out that we shouldn’t be surprised if a significant percentage of the country is.
The idea that Hillary Clinton wasn’t a true progressive is partly what fueled the Bernie Bro backlash against her, and yet she was there fighting a lot of the same fights he was fighting before anyone knew who he was, and she paid the price for it. That’s not to say that Hillary Clinton didn’t make mistakes or that she was a great campaigner who was only screwed because of her gender, but a lot of people who weren’t adults in the 1990s don’t realize that she paid a tremendous price by simply being an ambitious woman.
HRC never, ever was a progressive. She and her husband pioneered “Third Way” politics. Basically republicans who are ok with abortion and gay people.
She tried, a bit, to pretend she was a progressive but a lifetime of not being one undermined her.
Which is what will happen to Biden. After nearly 30 years he is all of a sudden contrite about things like the Anita Hill hearings and trying to minimize a lifetime of shitty decisions. Won’t work for him either.
Warren is overall a pretty unpopular figure but if the debates allow for it (hard to imagine how crowded stages spread over two nights can but if) she will be the one with the best skill set to knock Biden down some. Silver makes a pretty good argument for her potential as the main foil late in this discussion if interested.
Looking at Joe I don’t think he can last 18 months of campaigning. Maybe he’s just off to a slow start but watching his speech yesterday he didn’t exude a lot of energy. Compared to Barack Obama and Bill Clinton who were energetic and very on point as public speakers, Joe is more gaffe-prone but I always thought more relatable because his speeches were largely story-telling rather than prepared remarks.
I didn’t see that yesterday. To me he is only running because he is haunted at not running four years ago. I don’t think it will end well.
He’s run for president three times already and lost every time. Fourth time is a charm?
I believe he’s run twice before: '88 & '08. What’s the run I’m missing?
Not quite, but damn US healthcare is one huge juggernaut to attack. It was partially successful, as any such attacks will be. But it’s a lot easier to say that it failed and that Obama’s proposal failed than to admit that such moves are of the “if you would reach the moon, aim for the stars” variety; you will never reach the stated goal.
Wadda you mean, ‘stay’?