The Biden Cabinet and Transition Thread (1 Viewer)

< Previous | Next >

GrandAdmiral

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2019
Messages
1,586
Reaction score
1,958
Location
Center of the Universe
Offline
Ok the rules:
  • Your post can only contain one department and guess.
  • You may post more than once for different departments.
  • Post can contain comments about previous guesses.
  • Guesses for one department can be used for other departments.
  • Minds can, of course, be changed.
I will kick things off first...

Secretary of State: Susan Rice



This is as clear a choice as there can be. She has all of the credentials and rep to begin healing as relationships with our allies.
 

J-DONK

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
266
Reaction score
360
Age
41
Location
Minnesota
Offline
You would've thought that the progressives would have learned their lesson from 2016, but I guess we might have to do this all over again the way you guys are threatening 2022.

Look progressives may draw big in CA, VT, OR, WA, NY and get you the national popular vote but we all know that popular vote means absolutely dick and those states are already blue and will always be blue.

Problem is that you can't win presidential elections just off of blue states, you need to turn a few swing states as well which is what a moderate can do. My advice for progressives, settle for 75% of what you want now and stop threatening to blow the whole damn thing up just because you don't get 100% of what you want, we're sitting at a 6-3 SC disadvantage partially in thanks to your little temper tantrum in 2016. Call it scapegoating, but....it is what it is, own it and learn your lesson.

Edit:. And "Defund the Police" is a stupid arse slogan
Man this is such a horrible take. Who blames the voters, and not the candidate? How about this for a honest take on what went wrong in 2016. Run an actual primary, and try to find the best candidate. This would be like me saying black voters need to get on board with Bernie instead of voting against their interest with establishment Democrats. The issue is with the candidate in some way, not the voting block.

The irony is your post did point out how for some reason the scapegoat is always progressives, not things like the obvious flaws in the candidate, ala HRC.

2016: Progressives voted for other people
2020: Progressives talked about the police

At some point, you need to have a honest discussion as to why the working class doesn't vote for you anymore. I await with baited breath the hot takes you guys will have on why the 2022 midterm losses are all the fault of those pesky progressives.
 
Last edited:

BayouSAINTJoe

The Anti-Republican
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Messages
167
Reaction score
440
Age
39
Location
The Dirty Dell
Offline
Man this is such a horrible take. Who blames the voters, and not the candidate? How about this for a honest take on what went wrong in 2016. Run an actual primary, and try to find the best candidate. This would be like me saying black voters need to get on board with Bernie instead of voting against their interest with establishment Democrats. The issue is with the candidate in some way, not the voting block.

The irony is your post did point out how for some reason the scapegoat is always progressives, not things like the obvious flaws in the candidate, ala HRC.

2016: Progressives voted for other people
2020: Progressives talked about the police

At some point, you need to have a honest discussion as to why the working class doesn't vote for you anymore. I await with baited breath the hot takes you guys will have on why the 2022 midterm losses are all the fault of those pesky progressives.
I'm going to attempt to build an analogy here because I think the big picture is still escaping you.

Let's say you have a job at Obama enterprises where you started off at 70k/year but now you're making $95k year, 8 years after you started you were presented with 2 paths due to their leadership contract or whatever expiring:

Path 1 with the Clinton group, this group beat out a competitor, Sanders incorporated that was promising $115k annually but had no path to getting an approved budget that'll allow you to get that $115k, which ultimately caused the Sanders co to lose out on the continuation bid. The Clinton group has funding lined up to continue your 95k annual salary + 4% bump every year for inflation.

Path 2 with the trump organization where you're going to get absolutely nothing... along with getting nothing, this company was going to not only undo all of the projects you completed over the past 8 years but every other day, someone from the company will come over to your house and kick you in the balls...really hard just to stick it to you.

Now you're disappointed that the Sanders company which had your support didn't get the bid, but keep in mind that $115k that they promised had no chance of getting budgetary approval...so do you shun the Clinton group and get something or do you let the trump organization literally trash your last 8 years of progress and give you 0 of what you wanted?
 
Last edited:

MT15

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2019
Messages
3,699
Reaction score
6,239
Location
Midwest
Offline
Nobody here is blaming progressives for everything that’s wrong. And I actually like Bernie, voted for him in my state’s primary in 2016. It’s the attitude that some of his followers adopt that is so completely off-putting. And none of them will ever admit that they might ever be wrong about even one teeny tiny little thing. I don’t think you (J Donk) are what I would call a Bernie Bro, but you have used one of their stock in trade argument templates here. Maybe a couple, now that I think about it.

Try to acknowledge that there are other viewpoints that might be valid, or that progress can come in about in increments, or that everyone who doesn’t agree with every single thing you believe is somehow the enemy. Everyone seems to be either a white hat or a black hat. It’s bull crap. The smartest people I know are a lot less sure of themselves, and more open to seeing all sides, than this. Just my opinion.

Bayou Saint’s take has some real merit. it would do you good to think on it a little bit.
 

J-DONK

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
266
Reaction score
360
Age
41
Location
Minnesota
Offline
I'm going to attempt to build an analogy here because I think the big picture is still escaping you.

Let's say you have a job at Obama enterprises where you started off at 70k/year but now you're making $95k year, 8 years after you started you were presented with 2 paths due to their leadership contract or whatever expiring:

Path 1 with the Clinton group, this group beat out a competitor, Sanders incorporated that was promising $115k annually but had no path to getting an approved budget that'll allow you to get that $115k, which ultimately caused the Sanders co to lose out on the continuation bid. The Clinton group has funding lined up to continue your 95k annual salary + 4% bump every year for inflation.

Path 2 with the trump organization where you're going to get absolutely nothing... along with getting nothing, this company was going to not only undo all of the projects you completed over the past 8 years but every other day, someone from the company will come over to your house and kick you in the balls...really hard just to stick it to you.

Now you're disappointed that the Sanders company which had your support didn't get the bid, but keep in mind that $115k that they promised had no chance of getting budgetary approval...so do you shun the Clinton group and get something or do you let the trump organization literally trash your last 8 years of progress and give you 0 of what you wanted?
No, I got your point, but majority of Sanders supporters did vote for HRC and Biden. Not all HRC supporters did vote Obama in 08, but more did vote Obama then Sanders supporters voted for HRC in 16.

Let me make this super clear again.

The fault is not with progressives.

HRC was never Obama.

Her disapproval ratings were much higher. A nice way to say this is that candidate quality was lacking in 2016. That's why you saw more people voting for third party, or Trump.

You are still blaming the voting block. That's an extremely flawed way of viewing things.
 

wardorican

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2019
Messages
2,967
Reaction score
3,340
Age
40
Location
Ft. Lauderdale
Offline
Who said I hated Richmond? Are you upset that Vogel reported it? Are you also saying that the only people they could find to run these agencies are people that could personally profit based on their decisions running those very agencies?
No and No.
 

Taurus

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
543
Reaction score
1,180
Age
52
Location
Yacolt, WA
Offline
No, I got your point, but majority of Sanders supporters did vote for HRC and Biden. Not all HRC supporters did vote Obama in 08, but more did vote Obama then Sanders supporters voted for HRC in 16.

Let me make this super clear again.

The fault is not with progressives.

HRC was never Obama.

Her disapproval ratings were much higher. A nice way to say this is that candidate quality was lacking in 2016. That's why you saw more people voting for third party, or Trump.

You are still blaming the voting block. That's an extremely flawed way of viewing things.
The DNC really needs to look in the mirror and ask some hard questions.

Why is it that progressive policies like the $15/hr minimum wage, drug decriminalization, etc win in places where Democrat candidates, the ones who'd actually bring these policies to fruition, get their arses handed to them?
There's something off-putting about that D after a candidates name and whatever it is, the party had better figure it out and fix it or the deranged abortion that is the GOP will continue to win and continue to drive America right off the ledge.
I do agree that 'Defund the police' is an ill-considered slogan. It reminds me of an NPR interview I heard the other day with a public-health researcher talking about how to sell immunization to America.
He said that "herd immunity" is a negative phrase, it makes people think of cows and being a mindless follower. "Ok," I thought, "He's identified one of the problems, good." He then went on to say "What we ought to call it is 'hive immunity' because we're all working together to achieve it." I facepalmed almost hard enough to break my glasses.
This, this is the problem with the Democratic party. They finally figure out that a given slogan is a loser and decide to change it...so what do they do? They swap a slogan that makes people think of cows to one where they're compared to insects.
Jesus.
 

JRad

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
769
Reaction score
1,140
Age
37
Location
Baton Rouge
Offline
Try to acknowledge that there are other viewpoints that might be valid, or that progress can come in about in increments, or that everyone who doesn’t agree with every single thing you believe is somehow the enemy.
This is why a President Sanders never really would have struck me as a sign we’re going hard left. Compromise is, and should be, made. I believe Biden and Pete were right - make the public option better, and you don’t have to make MFA a mandate. People will choose it. Those who don’t weren’t going to go for the idea regardless. I think that can apply across the board.

I get the whole “broken <whatever> needs a sudden course correction” mentality, and in a way I agree. But forcing people to accept your way isn’t how you get people to accept your way.
 

BayouSAINTJoe

The Anti-Republican
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Messages
167
Reaction score
440
Age
39
Location
The Dirty Dell
Offline
The DNC really needs to look in the mirror and ask some hard questions.

Why is it that progressive policies like the $15/hr minimum wage, drug decriminalization, etc win in places where Democrat candidates, the ones who'd actually bring these policies to fruition, get their arses handed to them?
There's something off-putting about that D after a candidates name and whatever it is, the party had better figure it out and fix it or the deranged abortion that is the GOP will continue to win and continue to drive America right off the ledge.
I do agree that 'Defund the police' is an ill-considered slogan. It reminds me of an NPR interview I heard the other day with a public-health researcher talking about how to sell immunization to America.
He said that "herd immunity" is a negative phrase, it makes people think of cows and being a mindless follower. "Ok," I thought, "He's identified one of the problems, good." He then went on to say "What we ought to call it is 'hive immunity' because we're all working together to achieve it." I facepalmed almost hard enough to break my glasses.
This, this is the problem with the Democratic party. They finally figure out that a given slogan is a loser and decide to change it...so what do they do? They swap a slogan that makes people think of cows to one where they're compared to insects.
Jesus.
No, I got your point, but majority of Sanders supporters did vote for HRC and Biden. Not all HRC supporters did vote Obama in 08, but more did vote Obama then Sanders supporters voted for HRC in 16.

Let me make this super clear again.

The fault is not with progressives.

HRC was never Obama.

Her disapproval ratings were much higher. A nice way to say this is that candidate quality was lacking in 2016. That's why you saw more people voting for third party, or Trump.

You are still blaming the voting block. That's an extremely flawed way of viewing things.
But why is the Democratic side the only side where candidates have to pass some sort of charisma/policy test? Why can't dem voters just fall in line the way "Conservatives" do? This mindset of where "this person has to move me" is exactly why we're in a minority rule. What I want is for Dem voters to fall in line and vote for the Dem candidate no matter what because the other side doesn't give a good GD about their candidate's moral/ethical/intellectual/etc shortcomings just as long as they have that good 'ol "R" next to their name.

Seriously, look at Alabama, Doug Jones lost to Tommy freaking Tubberville who couldn't pass a 6th grade social studies lesson on the US Government and damn near lost to a guy last go round who stalked shopping malls in his 20s/30s for middle school girls.
 

Saint by the Bay

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 11, 2019
Messages
807
Reaction score
2,742
Age
48
Location
Houston, TX
Offline
But why is the Democratic side the only side where candidates have to pass some sort of charisma/policy test? Why can't dem voters just fall in line the way "Conservatives" do? This mindset of where "this person has to move me" is exactly why we're in a minority rule. What I want is for Dem voters to fall in line and vote for the Dem candidate no matter what because the other side doesn't give a good GD about their candidate's moral/ethical/intellectual/etc shortcomings just as long as they have that good 'ol "R" next to their name.

Seriously, look at Alabama, Doug Jones lost to Tommy freaking Tubberville who couldn't pass a 6th grade social studies lesson on the US Government and damn near lost to a guy last go round who stalked shopping malls in his 20s/30s for middle school girls.
Dem voters are not going to act like Republican voters. For Republicans, their party is their religion. They can't and won't move from it. The GOP has done a fantastic job of positioning themselves as the defenders of every majority demographic.

Male? Check
White? Check
Christian? Check
Hetero? Check

They basically have two policies, cut taxes and stop abortion. Everything else is <insert minority demographic here> is coming to get you and only we can save you. Fear is a powerful motivator, and they leave themselves so malleable on everything else their supporters can vote for Daddy to protect them and, like a child, make Daddy whatever they need for him to be in their mind.

Dem voters are different. To them, policy matters. To them, there are political consequences for bad behavior. So you will never get them to fall in line because there is far more complexity and nuance there. I think the party could do better with messaging, but how the heck do you really compete with mankind's biggest motivator, fear?
 
OP
GrandAdmiral

GrandAdmiral

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2019
Messages
1,586
Reaction score
1,958
Location
Center of the Universe
Offline
This was probably the only way Biden was going to get Rice into the administration outside of being his running mate.

 

insidejob

Well-known member
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
1,685
Reaction score
2,263
Age
85
Location
Back in 70124
Offline
This was probably the only way Biden was going to get Rice into the administration outside of being his running mate.

Serious question: Can't you sneak someone into a different position that's in the same ballpark that would've required senate confirmation this way? Seems like a pretty smart strategy to me.
 

wardorican

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2019
Messages
2,967
Reaction score
3,340
Age
40
Location
Ft. Lauderdale
Offline
The DNC really needs to look in the mirror and ask some hard questions.

Why is it that progressive policies like the $15/hr minimum wage, drug decriminalization, etc win in places where Democrat candidates, the ones who'd actually bring these policies to fruition, get their arses handed to them?
There's something off-putting about that D after a candidates name and whatever it is, the party had better figure it out and fix it or the deranged abortion that is the GOP will continue to win and continue to drive America right off the ledge.
I do agree that 'Defund the police' is an ill-considered slogan. It reminds me of an NPR interview I heard the other day with a public-health researcher talking about how to sell immunization to America.
He said that "herd immunity" is a negative phrase, it makes people think of cows and being a mindless follower. "Ok," I thought, "He's identified one of the problems, good." He then went on to say "What we ought to call it is 'hive immunity' because we're all working together to achieve it." I facepalmed almost hard enough to break my glasses.
This, this is the problem with the Democratic party. They finally figure out that a given slogan is a loser and decide to change it...so what do they do? They swap a slogan that makes people think of cows to one where they're compared to insects.
Jesus.
I'm not going to get into all of this, but a good portion of it ignores rural America and what is and isn't feasible.

I've said it before, a state wide or national min wage really doesn't make sense anymore. It should be regional / city based, like government per diem.

Another thing that would help balance out the need for cities to pay a lot more is finding ways to lower the rent and housing costs. I don't have the answers there, I have a few ideas.
 

DaveXA

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2018
Messages
1,861
Reaction score
1,250
Location
Vienna, VA (via Lafayette)
Offline
I'm not going to get into all of this, but a good portion of it ignores rural America and what is and isn't feasible.

I've said it before, a state wide or national min wage really doesn't make sense anymore. It should be regional / city based, like government per diem.

Another thing that would help balance out the need for cities to pay a lot more is finding ways to lower the rent and housing costs. I don't have the answers there, I have a few ideas.
I tend to agree, we need higher minimum wages for cities than rural areas to better reflect cost of living in the respective areas.
 

zztop

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
941
Reaction score
1,200
Age
121
Location
in a van down by the river
Offline

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.

< Previous | Next >

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Advertisement

General News Feed

Fact Checkers News Feed

Sponsored

Top Bottom