SHOULD Biden run for a 2nd term? (7 Viewers)

[SteveSBrickNJ]

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...
*

Octogenarian Biden begins new year facing age-old question on 2024 race

In the coming months, Biden faces a simple question: will he seek a second term at the end of which he would be 86?

www.theguardian.com

*

Biden 2024? Most Democrats say no thank you: AP-NORC poll

A majority of Democrats now think one term is plenty for President Joe Biden, despite his insistence that he plans to seek reelection in 2024. While Biden has trumpeted his legislative victories and ability to govern, the poll suggests relatively few U.S. adults give him high marks on either...

news.yahoo.com

*
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?

 

[SteveSBrickNJ]

also, in todays world, Reagan would be considered a RINO and get an F from the NRA, and woudn't make the top 5 of a Republican primary.

Oh well.
This is why I am an independent and not a republican.
There is a poster here...just one person who won't accept that.
This poster even went over on the EE board of Saints Report to say I'm a Republican.
That post was of course removed.
I WAS a Republican once...but my former Republican Party is gone.
It is the MAGA Party which uses the word "Republican" in name only.
I am anti Trump and not a MAGAite

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

The thing about being an extremist is that you begin to routinely see and hear only what you want. Case and point, this is what I said:

I, for one, believe we should walk run away from the whole region! They hate each other and they want to destroy each other, I say we let them do their thing. When their land end up as a wasteland, they would only have themselves to blame.

And here's what you believed I said:

And it’s not just “when they destroy each other”.

As for the rest of your response...

Israel has had a reign of apartheid and instituted ethnic cleaning of the Palestinian people since 1948 and now has committed genocide against the people of Gaza with the US supporting it fully with their weapons. If this country had any moral compass with regard to our foreign policy, we would've dumped Israel. But the US doesn't dominate the globe militarily to be a peacekeeper.

I don't care what happens over there because BOTH SIDES have shown that the last thing they want is peace, they want the other gone and I say them them...Good Luck With That!

As for Tlaib's American constituents, she would do them all a great service to remind them that they are American citizens now and our government conducts itself abroad with U.S. national interest as the #1 priority.

 

[Heathen]

The thing about being an extremist is that you begin to routinely see and hear only what you want. Case and point, this is what I said:

Who are you calling an extremist?

And here's what you believed I said:

I think I mistyped (on mobile) but most certainly meant only to quote what you said - "they want to destroy each other"

As for the rest of your response...

I don't care what happens over there because BOTH SIDES have shown that the last thing they want is peace, they want the other gone and I say them them...Good Luck With That!

You really should care.

People being massacred because of their race, ethnicity, origin, religion etc. is something that everyone regardless of where they live should strongly condemn.

You also don't have a choice - if we're being explicit - but to care when your tax dollars (and mine) are being used to blow up children.

As for Tlaib's American constituents, she would do them all a great service to remind them that they are American citizens now and our government conducts itself abroad with U.S. national interest as the #1 priority.

First, what does this even mean? It could be interpreted many ways.

"They are American citizens now"? They've been American citizens for a long time.

"US national interest as no.1 priority"? What is this priority, by your definition? And how do you know it?

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Who are you calling an extremist?

Think of it as a cautionary observation.

I think I mistyped (on mobile) but most certainly meant only to quote what you said - "they want to destroy each other"

You could understand why I could make such an observation. You then went on to point out Israel's part in this ongoing conflict and ignore the Palestinian's role. There are extremist within both sides of this dispute that have consistently undermined any progression to a peaceful solution to their dispute. Whether it was terrorist attacks by Palestinians during the Oslo Accords negotiations or the assassination of the former Israeli PM by an Israeli terrorist.

You really should care.

People being massacred because of their race, ethnicity, origin, religion etc. is something that everyone regardless of where they live should strongly condemn.

You also don't have a choice - if we're being explicit - but to care when your tax dollars (and mine) are being used to blow up children.

Again,

I, for one, believe we should walk run away from the whole region!

I'll add that we need to hold our documented ALLY, Israel, accountable for their actions! Like it or not, they are an ally to the US and it is in our national interest to support our allies. Israel needs to be reminded in the most stringent of THEIR obligations to the U.S. and their continuation of aggression and oppression will not be tolerated but there are too many outside of our government that would disagree with that position. I am in the minority with that belief and I accept that.

First, what does this even mean? It could be interpreted many ways.

"They are American citizens now"? They've been American citizens for a long time.

Their allegiance is to the United States. Their votes shouldn't be swayed by this ONE issue because it serves their self-interest , it should weighed against the totality of issues and how it affect our society as a whole.

"US national interest as no.1 priority"? What is this priority, by your definition? And how do you know it?

For me, these come to mind:
1. To protect US citizens at home and abroad.
2. Support, promote Democracies world-wide and defend those allies that share our values.
3. Seek to find common ground with those that oppose our values.
These values are enshrined in our Constitution.

 

[Heathen]

Think of it as a cautionary observation.

I'd just say what you mean next time.

You could understand why I could make such an observation. You then went on to point out Israel's part in this ongoing conflict and ignore the Palestinian's role. There are extremist within both sides of this dispute that have consistently undermined any progression to a peaceful solution to their dispute. Whether it was terrorist attacks by Palestinians during the Oslo Accords negotiations or the assassination of the former Israeli PM by an Israeli terrorist.

No, I couldn't.

I'm talking about what's happening right now, which is a genocide of a particular people. You're the one trying to 'both sides' this issue.

Would you act the same way if Israelis were being massacred because of who they are?

Again,

I'll add that we need to hold our documented ALLY, Israel, accountable for their actions! Like it or not, they are an ally to the US and it is in our national interest to support our allies. Israel needs to be reminded in the most stringent of THEIR obligations to the U.S. and their continuation of aggression and oppression will not be tolerated but there are too many outside of our government that would disagree with that position. I am in the minority with that belief and I accept that.

It's been 4 months, man. 4 months of people being massacred. 30,000 dead. And the US has done nothing to stop it.

Their allegiance is to the United States. Their votes shouldn't be swayed by this ONE issue because it serves their self-interest , it should weighed against the totality of issues and how it affect our society as a whole.

Yeah. So as I've told others, if this is how you feel and you're really worried about the election - I'm sure you'll have no problem telling Palestinian - Americans in Michigan who have had relatives slaughtered that they need to stop this 'self interest' pity party and fall in line to vote "the right way".

Right?

For me, these come to mind:
1. To protect US citizens at home and abroad.
2. Support, promote Democracies world-wide and defend those allies that share our values.
3. Seek to find common ground with those that oppose our values.
These values are enshrined in our Constitution.

And how are ANY of these being exercised in the United States' steadfast support of genocide in Gaza at the hands of Israel?

It's actually the complete opposite of everything you just said....

By the US supporting the IDF's killing of Palestinians and destroying their land, one could unequivocally say it is:

1. Increasing the likelihood of death and endangerment of US citizens abroad and at home
2. Actively destroying any semblance of a democracy for the Palestinian people
3. NOT seeking to find common ground with those that oppose our values in the Middle East

So why is the US actively acting against its national interest?

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

I'm talking about what's happening right now, which is a genocide of a particular people. You're the one trying to 'both sides' this issue.

And I'm talking about the whole conflict. The elimination of the other is what both sides want.

Would you act the same way if Israelis were being massacred because of who they are?

Yes, I would hold both parties accountable for their actions toward war instead of seeking a peaceful resolution. The Palestinians want the Israelis gone and vice versa, they refuse to live together because of their secular beliefs.

It's been 4 months, man. 4 months of people being massacred. 30,000 dead. And the US has done nothing to stop it.

That is true and to answer that question you need to stop looking at it as if "The Biden Administration" are the ones failing to hold Israel responsible. We, as a nation, are responsible and until there are enough of us that is ready to withdraw from our documented alliance with Israel, that alliance will continue. Congress has the ability to force an end to that alliance, those that feel so passionately about it should focus their energy towards Congress instead of the President.

Yeah. So as I've told others, if this is how you feel and you're really worried about the election - I'm sure you'll have no problem telling Palestinian - Americans in Michigan who have had relatives slaughtered that they need to stop this 'self interest' pity party and fall in line to vote "the right way".

Right?

Yes, they voting for the President of the United States, not Gaza! We have our own problems to address and they should weigh those problems ahead of what is happening abroad. The phrase "cutting off nose to spite face" comes to mind.

And how are ANY of these being exercised in the United States' steadfast support of genocide in Gaza at the hands of Israel?

They are not, that is why I believe our alliance with Israel should be rescinded. The Israeli government have reach the point to where their actions are incompatible with our national interest. I also recognize that my opinion of our Israeli alliance is not shared with the overwhelming majority of this country and I understand that.

There isn't a single candidate for ANY office that share my ALL of my concerns, I choose to select the candidate that will address most of my concerns and that will work towards the advancement of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

 

[Optimus Prime]

The Biden campaign and the Democratic Party raised more $42m in January in a fundraising haul “driven by” grassroots efforts, officials said.

The Democrats now have $130m in cash on hand as the general election season is set to be one of the longest in recent memory.

Julie Chavez Rodriguez, Biden’s campaign manager, said in a statement that “January’s fundraising haul – driven by a powerhouse grassroots fundraising program that continues to grow month by month – is an indisputable show of strength to start the election year”.

The campaign claimed to have raised almost $278m since April last year, saying that its $130m cash on hand was the “highest total of any democratic candidate in history”.

The president’s re-election campaign also noted that January was its strongest month for grassroots fundraising.……

Biden campaign and Democrats raise $42m in January ‘driven by grassroots’

Strong numbers for president’s re-election effort comes amid weak polling as Biden campaign focuses on democracy and personal freedoms to trash Trump

www.independent.co.uk

 

[MT15]

I don’t have a problem with Tlaib suggesting what she did. Everyone has to decide what’s most important for themselves. I also don’t think she will find the support she seems to think she will get, but that’s just my guess. We shall see. Either way it will be a helpful way for the Biden campaign to gauge how much this issue might affect the election.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

I don’t have a problem with Tlaib suggesting what she did. Everyone has to decide what’s most important for themselves. I also don’t think she will find the support she seems to think she will get, but that’s just my guess. We shall see. Either way it will be a helpful way for the Biden campaign to gauge how much this issue might affect the election.

I do. She took an oath to the American people and she is betraying that oath by putting the needs of the Palestinians over the citizens of the United States of America. She is also encouraging her constituents to focus their voting power to influence the needs of Gaza.

 

[LA - L.A.]

I do. She took an oath to the American people and she is betraying that oath by putting the needs of the Palestinians over the citizens of the United States of America. She is also encouraging her constituents to focus their voting power to influence the needs of Gaza.

I don't think Tlaib sees the needs of Americans as mutually exclusive to needs of Palestinians.

She's only doing this in the primary. She knows that Biden is going to be the nominee, so this protest vote is just to draw attention and to note the objection to current policy. I highly doubt Tlaib will call for voters not to vote for Biden in the general election.

I personally don't see her as betraying her oath. Some of her constituents have family and friends in Gaza, so it is a legitimate issue for some of her constituents and Tlaib is doing what she can to make their voices heard. She's supposed to represent all of her constituents, not just some of them.

 

[J-DONK]

I didn't see this posted.

OP-ED piece from the NYTimes stating Biden should step aside, and the party pick someone at the convention.

Opinion | Democrats Have a Better Option Than Biden

It requires them to embrace an old-fashioned approach to winning a campaign.

www.nytimes.com

So then what? Step one, unfortunately, is convincing Biden that he should not run again. That he does not want to risk being Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Let’s say that happens: Biden steps aside. Then what? Well, then Democrats do something that used to be common in politics but hasn’t been in decades. They pick their nominee at the convention. This is how parties chose their nominees for most of American history. From roughly 1831 to 1968, this is how it worked. In a way, this is still how it works.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

I don't think Tlaib sees the needs of Americans as mutually exclusive to needs of Palestinians.

Then she is failing as an elected official of our government. E pluribus unum.

She's only doing this in the primary. She knows that Biden is going to be the nominee, so this protest vote is just to draw attention and to note the objection to current policy. I highly doubt Tlaib will call for voters not to vote for Biden in the general election.
I personally don't see her as betraying her oath. Some of her constituents have family and friends in Gaza, so it is a legitimate issue for some of her constituents and Tlaib is doing what she can to make their voices heard. She's supposed to represent all of her constituents, not just some of them.

That may be true for Tlaib, but how does she resolve her actions during the primary vs the general elections? Her current actions working against the government are solidifying her constituents position against our government in regard to Gaza. She would do better if she was as strong an advocate for the United States as she is for Palestinians.

 

[LA - L.A.]

I didn't see this posted.

OP-ED piece from the NYTimes stating Biden should step aside, and the party pick someone at the convention.

Opinion | Democrats Have a Better Option Than Biden

It requires them to embrace an old-fashioned approach to winning a campaign.

www.nytimes.com

Could turn into a huge advantage. Let Trump and Republicans keep attacking Biden personally instead of on policy until the Democratic National Convention, then switch to a candidate that doesn't have the personal vulnerabilities that Biden has. All the money, time and advertising production that went into attacking Biden personally now goes down the drain. And guess what, the RNC and Trump aren't lagging behind past fund raising levels. Not the best scenario to be facing in the final stretch of campaigning.

I highly doubt that Biden doesn't get the nomination, but it could be a huge problem for Republicans if the Democrats choose a younger and equally or more liked candidate at the convention.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Then she is failing as an elected official of our government. E pluribus unum.

E pluribus unum is not about conformity or hegemony, it's actually the opposite. It means that the voices, rights and needs of every individual are equally part of the whole. It's a validation of everyone speaking and being heard. It's a reminder that we are not homogeneous or monolithic in our unity as a whole.

For those reason, I think Tlaib is excelling in her role as a representative and a voice for all of her constituents and not just some of her constituents.

That may be true for Tlaib, but how does she resolve her actions during the primary vs the general elections?

Why don't we give her a chance to show us at that time instead of making any judgements of her now?

Her current actions working against the government are solidifying her constituents position against our government in regard to Gaza.

"Our government" is just as much her constituents government, because they are an equal part of us and our government. They have just as much right as anyone to say what they want "our government" to do.

Everyone who votes has voiced opposition to our government's position on issues and will voice opposition again. Democracy allows dissent, it doesn't stifle it.

She would do better if she was as strong an advocate for the United States as she is for Palestinians.

She can do both and I think she does do both. She does not have to agree with Biden's policies or support Biden to be an advocate for the US. Silent obedience and submission, and advocacy are not the same thing.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

E pluribus unum is not about conformity or hegemony, it's actually the opposite. It means that the voices, rights and needs of every individual are equally part of the whole. It's a validation of everyone speaking and being heard. It's a reminder that we are not homogeneous or monolithic in our unity as a whole.

Eh, I take it as is, "Out of many, one". Multiple people of multiple origins coming together to work towards a common goal.

For those reason, I think Tlaib is excelling in her role as a representative and a voice for all of her constituents and not just some of her constituents.

The population of her district is over 750K and a little over 10% are of Arab descent. I know if I lived in her district, I would feel misrepresented. She staunchly advocates for Palestinian-Americans and I applaud her for that, but her advocacy doesn't stop at our borders.

Why don't we give her a chance to show us at that time instead of making any judgements of her now?

I asked how will she resolve campaigning for "Uncommitted" for the primary and then turning around and campaigning for Biden in the general.

"Our government" is just as much her constituents government, because they are an equal part of us and our government. They have just as much right as anyone to say what they want "our government" to do.

Everyone who votes has voiced opposition to our government's position on issues and will voice opposition again. Democracy allows dissent, it doesn't stifle it.

Agreed. But, again, Tlaib's advocacy is disproportionate, considering the demographics of her district.

She can do both and I think she does do both. She does not have to agree with Biden's policies or support Biden to be an advocate for the US. Silent obedience and submission, and advocacy are not the same thing.

I think she doesn't. I used to admire her accomplishments but, time and again, she will side with Palestinians over the citizens of her own country.

 

[SteveSBrickNJ]

Is this the Tlaib thread?

 

[J-DONK]

Is this the Tlaib thread?

I tried to bring it back man.

 

[SamAndreas]

I didn't see this posted.

OP-ED piece from the NYTimes stating Biden should step aside, and the party pick someone at the convention.

Opinion | Democrats Have a Better Option Than Biden

It requires them to embrace an old-fashioned approach to winning a campaign.

www.nytimes.com

That's that Ezra Klein guy. I don't turn to FOX News, nor do I turn to Ezra Klein.

I do turn to Barbra Lee.

I got to vote for her again yesterday. Years ago she was my Representative and I was proud that she did speak for me, I always voted for her. She's running for the US Senate so I got to vote for her again. Twice I voted for her on one ballot. She's on the ballot running for the Senate now, and again for the Senate for next year as well.