SHOULD Biden run for a 2nd term? (3 Viewers)

Users who are viewing this thread

    SteveSBrickNJ

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Jan 7, 2022
    Messages
    1,716
    Reaction score
    820
    Age
    62
    Location
    New Jersey
    Offline
    Biden has lost support from many people who voted for him in the past.
    He is getting up there in age.
    Here are a couple of sites I'd like to share...
    *
    *
    *
    WHAT DO ANY OF YOU THINK?
    IS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY BEST SERVED BY HAVING PRESIDENT BIDEN RUN FOR ANOTHER TERM OR WOULD A DIFFERENT CANDIDATE BE BETTER? :unsure:
     
    If people have forgotten, I'm sure Trump will remind them once they start paying attention to a 2 person race between Trump and Biden.

    I don't know for sure, it's just my feeling of how things will play out. The only motivation strong than love is hate. And a lot of people hate Trump.

    I hope you are right, but I feel like it is more likely than not that Trump is going to get elected again.
     
    Yes, hopefully that is enough to save us.

    I just have a really bad feeling.

    What would sadden but not surprise me is for the GOP to gin up some truly massive, inescapable ballot fraud that hands the election to Trump. A glaringly, hilariously illegitimate win that we'd have to figure out how to undo.

    The chaos will be catastrophic.
     
    What would sadden but not surprise me is for the GOP to gin up some truly massive, inescapable ballot fraud that hands the election to Trump. A glaringly, hilariously illegitimate win that we'd have to figure out how to undo.

    The chaos will be catastrophic.

    I don't see any reason for them to do that.

    It is more likely than not that Trump wins.
     
    I don't see any reason for them to do that.

    It is more likely than not that Trump wins.

    That's the point, though. They wouldn't risk it. I mean, if Trump could cheat, he would. There's no doubt in my mind that if someone came to him with a scheme that would show him as the winner even for an hour, he'd do it.

    Assume the office "on a temporary basis, while we figure it out", crush the investigation and bask in narcissistic supply while the nation comes apart at the seams.
     
    That's the point, though. They wouldn't risk it. I mean, if Trump could cheat, he would. There's no doubt in my mind that if someone came to him with a scheme that would show him as the winner even for an hour, he'd do it.

    Assume the office "on a temporary basis, while we figure it out", crush the investigation and bask in narcissistic supply while the nation comes apart at the seams.

    The democrats have completely rigged their primary.

    Did you notice there wasn't a dem cacus last week in Iowa? Isn't it odd that Biden isn't on the ballot tonight in New Hampshire?

    Neither party is above doing whatever they can get away with.
     
    The democrats have completely rigged their primary.

    Did you notice there wasn't a dem cacus last week in Iowa? Isn't it odd that Biden isn't on the ballot tonight in New Hampshire?

    Neither party is above doing whatever they can get away with.
    The Democratic National committee has scrapped the Iowa caucus because of the complete disaster that unfolded in 2020, where we didn’t know the winner for days because they botched it. It’s past time for caucuses to go away in favor of actual elections.

    They also decided that NH isn’t really a good state to go first, because it just doesn’t accurately reflect the Democratic Party demographically and people put too much emphasis on this somewhat non-representative, tiny state. Of course NH took exception, and decided to hold their primary first anyway, but it isn’t a valid primary as far as the DNC is concerned.

    I am going from memory here, but these decisions were made quite a while ago, pretty soon after the 2020 election.
     
    Did you notice there wasn't a dem cacus last week in Iowa? Isn't it odd that Biden isn't on the ballot tonight in New Hampshire?

    (article from 2023)

    According to a primary calendar first proposed by the president himself, South Carolina will be the first state to hold a primary that awards delegates for the Democratic National Convention in Chicago next year.

    New Hampshire was pushed back further in the party's calendar, but state law requires New Hampshire to host the nation's first primaries. State Democrats couldn't convince state legislators to reverse Granite State statute, but they also didn't try terribly hard, since they disagreed with the DNC's decision. Anyone who runs in the January Democratic primary won't be awarded delegates by the DNC.
     
    The Democratic National committee has scrapped the Iowa caucus because of the complete disaster that unfolded in 2020, where we didn’t know the winner for days because they botched it. It’s past time for caucuses to go away in favor of actual elections.

    They also decided that NH isn’t really a good state to go first, because it just doesn’t accurately reflect the Democratic Party demographically and people put too much emphasis on this somewhat non-representative, tiny state. Of course NH took exception, and decided to hold their primary first anyway, but it isn’t a valid primary as far as the DNC is concerned.

    I am going from memory here, but these decisions were made quite a while ago, pretty soon after the 2020 election.

    Yea, they decided to put the state that Biden is stronger in first.
     
    (article from 2023)

    According to a primary calendar first proposed by the president himself, South Carolina will be the first state to hold a primary that awards delegates for the Democratic National Convention in Chicago next year.

    New Hampshire was pushed back further in the party's calendar, but state law requires New Hampshire to host the nation's first primaries. State Democrats couldn't convince state legislators to reverse Granite State statute, but they also didn't try terribly hard, since they disagreed with the DNC's decision. Anyone who runs in the January Democratic primary won't be awarded delegates by the DNC.

    Yes, Biden proposed that they move one of the states he is strongest in, to first. It was probably one of the promises he made to Jim Clyburn to get his endorsement in 2020.

    If Trump had done something like that, we'd be giving him shirt, but we excuse it because it's Biden.
     
    Yes, Biden proposed that they move one of the states he is strongest in, to first. It was probably one of the promises he made to Jim Clyburn to get his endorsement in 2020.

    If Trump had done something like that, we'd be giving him shirt, but we excuse it because it's Biden.

    eh, I don't know about that. Maybe some are all for traditions etc, but I don't care which state goes first or when. I think most of us are fairly confident that when it is all said and done (unless something unforeseen happens - like a death or jail etc) there is a high probability it will be Biden vs Trump again

    Anyways, here is an interview by Cyburn after the change

    “I don’t think you’re stacking the deck,” he told Wallace. “I think you’re avoiding embarrassment. And that is what he is attempting to avoid here. And I would expect anybody to do the same.”

    Asked if states such as Iowa and New Hampshire, which for years have led the Democratic nominating schedule, could potentially embarrass Biden, Clyburn pointed to the demographics in the state.

    “Well, if you do not have the demographics as required for Democrats in the general election, and neither one of those states have the Democrat or the demographics that are favorable to Democrats in the general, I think we know that,” he responded
     
    Yes, Biden proposed that they move one of the states he is strongest in, to first. It was probably one of the promises he made to Jim Clyburn to get his endorsement in 2020.

    If Trump had done something like that, we'd be giving him shirt, but we excuse it because it's Biden.
    You are making a lot of assumptions. I realize you have soured on Biden, but I think you’re just being overly negative about stuff like this. The point is valid: why should Iowa, with their homogeneity and their inability to run their caucus be rewarded with going first? Why should NH, another state with very little national significance go first? Every election these first states take on outsized importance, and they don’t really matter in the grand scheme of things.

    It’s just not a good system. For example, why should Iowa, with its relatively large evangelical population compared to the nation as a whole, be the deciding factor for Rs? Maybe DeSantis catches up later in other states? I think it’s a valid point that Dems addressed.
     
    You are making a lot of assumptions. I realize you have soured on Biden, but I think you’re just being overly negative about stuff like this. The point is valid: why should Iowa, with their homogeneity and their inability to run their caucus be rewarded with going first? Why should NH, another state with very little national significance go first? Every election these first states take on outsized importance, and they don’t really matter in the grand scheme of things.

    It’s just not a good system. For example, why should Iowa, with its relatively large evangelical population compared to the nation as a whole, be the deciding factor for Rs? Maybe DeSantis catches up later in other states? I think it’s a valid point that Dems addressed.

    There isn't anything new about the Primary order not being representative of the country. That wasn't some epiphany they suddenly had.

    Regardless of what they say, the change was made to help Biden.

    We shouldn't have party-controlled primaries at all.

    There should be a national open primary in June, and the top two get put on the general election ballot.
     
    There isn't anything new about the Primary order not being representative of the country. That wasn't some epiphany they suddenly had.

    Regardless of what they say, the change was made to help Biden.

    We shouldn't have party-controlled primaries at all.

    There should be a national open primary in June, and the top two get put on the general election ballot.
    I can agree with the national primary. But I will disagree with you that the change was made to help Biden. He’s the incumbent, he doesn’t need the help. It was done to help future candidates be more diverse.
     
    (article from 2023)

    According to a primary calendar first proposed by the president himself, South Carolina will be the first state to hold a primary that awards delegates for the Democratic National Convention in Chicago next year.

    New Hampshire was pushed back further in the party's calendar, but state law requires New Hampshire to host the nation's first primaries. State Democrats couldn't convince state legislators to reverse Granite State statute, but they also didn't try terribly hard, since they disagreed with the DNC's decision. Anyone who runs in the January Democratic primary won't be awarded delegates by the DNC.
    I still think it’s weird to be state law that they must be first

    What if another state passes a law that says they must be first?

    What if they all do?
     
    Last edited:
    There isn't anything new about the Primary order not being representative of the country. That wasn't some epiphany they suddenly had.

    Regardless of what they say, the change was made to help Biden.

    We shouldn't have party-controlled primaries at all.

    There should be a national open primary in June, and the top two get put on the general election ballot.

    And I'll add, this is the type of stuff that doesn't make Republicans bat an eye, but makes Democrats indignant, denounce the impurity, and vote for some 3rd party candidate or not vote at all in the general. Tastes like 2015 Hillary.
     
    There isn't anything new about the Primary order not being representative of the country. That wasn't some epiphany they suddenly had.

    Regardless of what they say, the change was made to help Biden.

    We shouldn't have party-controlled primaries at all.

    There should be a national open primary in June, and the top two get put on the general election ballot.

    Biden is the incumbent and don’t incumbents always overwhelmingly win the primaries and caucuses?

    Why would South Carolina being first “help” him anymore than Iowa or anywhere else?

    I do like the National Primary idea

    All at once and get it over with
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom