Democratic Party - Clueless & Feckless - is the D party done?

[fskimospy]

The things Biden was able to achieve with what little power he had was nothing short of a miracle. That sounds Biden-stannish, but it's just a reality. Nothing to do with liking or disliking the guy.

Biden was exceptionally legislatively successful given the circumstances.

 

[manly]

The things Biden was able to achieve with what little power he had was nothing short of a miracle. That sounds Biden-stannish, but it's just a reality. Nothing to do with liking or disliking the guy.

Absolutely, and it plays into why his fellow Dems didn't revolt at the idea that he could go another 4 years. IMHO the vast majority didn't know then what we all learned in July 2024. The Biden admin also helped steer us out of a pandemic. The shit he's been blamed for, he largely inherited: global inflation and a migrant crisis at the southern border.

What cost us the election was Joe Biden selfishly decided to run again, quit very late in the ball game, and Kamala Harris was left holding the bag. I'm not saying she's blameless, but I'm saying she's not the nominee if we had normal primary elections. Slice and dice it how you want to, but the die was cast when Biden decided in 2023 that he wasn't going to ride off into the sunset.

So yeah I do blame Joe for his selfishness or hubris, or whatever you want to call it. Everything else that happened was a consequence of that fatal error. As to his ultimate legacy, I don't think it's trashed... unless Trump 2.0 utterly destroys America.

 

[MrSquished]

I honestly don't think it "cost us the election." Inflation cost us the election. Misinformation cost us the election. MSM cost us the election. Conservative media and their drones repeating disinformation cost us the election. The widening wealth gap cost us the election. These factors and many others each on their own contributed more to Trump's win than something so trivial as candidate selection. Hell, her demographics probably each cost her more votes than anything you can come up with personality-wise.

Maybe, maybe a huge celebrity running might have been enough to change things. That is the level of stupidity and raw emotion we are dealing with at the national level. Take Gavin Newsome for example. Literally the only negative thing you could say about him is that he is a California Democrat. That would have likely been all it would take to scare enough people to vote for Trump. If a person is dumb enough to believe Biden is to blame for inflation then they're dumb enough to be programmed to be scared of California Democrats, the same way everyone was programmed to believe Kamala was to blame for inflation.

I strongly disagree. Inflation was associated with the Biden administration - incumbents were losing, that's exactly why a primary would have been the most likely way of putting forth a candidate not so strongly associated with the Biden administration - namely the two figureheads of that - Joe and Kamala. The fact you can't wrap your head around that is disappointing. Dumb people associated Biden/Harris with things like inflation. If you don't think dumb people can be swayed with neither of those people on the ballot and a different strong candidate, well, don't get into political campaigns. I mean we have data to show how unpopular the Biden administration was - and from his own BASE! Imagine thinking running someone outside the administration would not have helped at all, well to me that is bonkers.

I have stated numerous times the Dems have a higher hill to climb due to the right wing disinformation mediasphere and the total failure of the mainstream media as well - and the failure of our education system - and that hate is easier to sell than good policy - so it's fair to say I am not looking at just the candidacies in a vacuum.

Kamal did not lose by a landslide, we didn't have to convince that many more voters to show up. And she was a minority AND a woman and she had it within the reach of 200K votes in some swing states. The Dems had a shot here to win.

This party can never become better if people can't understand the massive failures here, and how politics actually works. This election was winnable.

To say oh nothing would have mattered is just sad as fuck and shows a defeatism when information literally says otherwise.

Be better.

 

[dank69]

Absolutely, and it plays into why his fellow Dems didn't revolt at the idea that he could go another 4 years. IMHO the vast majority didn't know then what we all learned in July 2024. The Biden admin also helped steer us out of a pandemic. The shit he's been blamed for, he largely inherited: global inflation and a migrant crisis at the southern border.

What cost us the election was Joe Biden selfishly decided to run again, quit very late in the ball game, and Kamala Harris was left holding the bag. I'm not saying she's blameless, but I'm saying she's not the nominee if we had normal primary elections. Slice and dice it how you want to, but the die was cast when Biden decided in 2023 that he wasn't going to ride off into the sunset.

So yeah I do blame Joe for his selfishness or hubris, or whatever you want to call it. Everything else that happened was a consequence of that fatal error. As to his ultimate legacy, I don't think it's trashed... unless Trump 2.0 utterly destroys America.

Honestly, and again I am trying not to sound Biden-stannish, I don't think it was selfishness or hubris. I think he believed to his core that he was the only candidate that could beat Trump, because of his history of appealing to red-state voters better than any of the other candidates.

 

[manly]

Honestly, and again I am trying not to sound Biden-stannish, I don't think it was selfishness or hubris. I think he believed to his core that he was the only candidate that could beat Trump, because of his history of appealing to red-state voters better than any of the other candidates.

That's the 2020 argument in a nutshell. Does it still apply in 2024's tough environment for incumbents worldwide?* Also that argument presumes that Biden still has all of his marbles, which we later find out he doesn't.

But for arguments sake, let's pretend Joe Biden didn't recognize his own cognitive decline in 2023. I strongly believe his inner circle saw the decline (because they had worked to minimize its public visibility), and they still wanted him to run for reelection. Call it whatever you want to, but I call that bullshit.

* Like I said earlier, some people still believe Biden could have won in November. Partly because he'd done it four years ago.

 

[dank69]

I strongly disagree. Inflation was associated with the Biden administration - incumbents were losing, that's exactly why a primary would have been the most likely way of putting forth a candidate not so strongly associated with the Biden administration - namely the two figureheads of that - Joe and Kamala. The fact you can't wrap your head around that is disappointing. Dumb people associated Biden/Harris with things like inflation. If you don't think dumb people can be swayed with neither of those people on the ballot and a different strong candidate, well, don't get into political campaigns. I mean we have data to show how unpopular the Biden administration was - and from his own BASE! Imagine thinking running someone outside the administration would not have helped at all, well to me that is bonkers.

I have stated numerous times the Dems have a higher hill to climb due to the right wing disinformation mediasphere and the total failure of the mainstream media as well - and the failure of our education system - and that hate is easier to sell than good policy - so it's fair to say I am not looking at just the candidacies in a vacuum.

Kamal did not lose by a landslide, we didn't have to convince that many more voters to show up. And she was a minority AND a woman and she had it within the reach of 200K votes in some swing states. The Dems had a shot here to win.

This party can never become better if people can't understand the massive failures here, and how politics actually works. This election was winnable.

To say oh nothing would have mattered is just sad as fuck and shows a defeatism when information literally says otherwise.

Be better.

Yes the polls say it was about inflation because that was the most effective hammer conservative media had vs. Biden and Kamala. You admitted yourself that people had to be stupid to fall for it, but that's exactly what they did.

What you're not accounting for is that stupid people will fall for a lot of things. Conservative media has plenty of different hammers for any situation. Back to Newsome to illustrate this point: sure they couldn't blame him for inflation, but they can scare all of the exact same people by simply tweaking the message. "Look at how expensive homes are in CA! Inflation is already bad and now Dems want to bring CA policy to the entire nation!"

That took me 3 seconds to think about and now every person that voted against Bidenomics is voting against Gavinflation. Rolls right off the tongue. Imagine the full might of conservative media behind it. It doesn't matter who you throw up, the media is going to tear them apart.

You keep saying this election was winnable as if the only thing needed was a solid candidate with ample time to run a proper campaign. I disagree. If anything, one of Kamala's biggest bonuses was how late in the game she became a candidate. Trump and conservative media were freaking the fuck out because they were not prepared. They forgot how easy it is to program their meat bags to think whatever the fuck they want about literally anything. 3 nights of Fox and Newsmax blaring whatever and you're hearing about it from their drones at the coffee machine the following Monday morning like it's "common sense."

 

[dlerious]

To be clear, I'm not giving them excuses. If Pelosi and Schumer knew 20 months ago what we finally saw in July, then obviously they are at the least complicit. The thing about cognitive decline is that yes the signs are there, if you're looking for them and evaluating with open eyes. Hindsight is always 20/20 but when his team was stage managing the fuck out of him for the past two years, it's just not that obvious. We all knew Biden was old as fuck, but we didn't know he's losing his marbles. Until we saw it, and then we knew.

They knew. Just look at their actions regarding Dianne Feinstein. They thought they could control him, but Jill said NO.

 

[dank69]

Curiosity got me so I checked. There are exactly 7 hits on Google for "Gavinflation" as of right now, not including my post above which hasn't been indexed yet. Two from a single profile on MSN, three from two profiles on shitter, one Facebook post from 4 years ago, and one from some site called instapundit.

 

[ivwshane]

Curiosity got me so I checked. There are exactly 7 hits on Google for "Gavinflation" as of right now, not including my post above which hasn't been indexed yet. Two from a single profile on MSN, three from two profiles on shitter, one Facebook post from 4 years ago, and one from some site called instapundit.

Interesting. Definitely something to keep an eye on, just to see how this type of propaganda starts and spreads.

 

[MrSquished]

This was a very well written article about how the Dems really fucked up by letting these old fossils shut down AOC and the oversight committee ranking member. She had it in the bag too until the septuagenarians started getting all uppity.

Opinion | This is the worst time for Democrats to keep AOC on the backbench

In rejecting the New York congresswoman as ranking member of the Oversight Committee, Democrats sent a depressing message about their priorities.

www.msnbc.com

 

[Jaskalas]

This was a very well written article about how the Dems really fucked up by letting these old fossils shut down AOC and the oversight committee ranking member. She had it in the bag too until the septuagenarians started getting all uppity.

Opinion | This is the worst time for Democrats to keep AOC on the backbench

In rejecting the New York congresswoman as ranking member of the Oversight Committee, Democrats sent a depressing message about their priorities.

www.msnbc.com

Yeah, their message is they want to shift hard right.
Why help the people when instead... you can offer them a pillow while the GOP !@#$s them?

 

[manly]

They knew. Just look at their actions regarding Dianne Feinstein. They thought they could control him, but Jill said NO.

Apples and oranges. Dems needed the corpse of Feinstein to get judges approved. Senate Judiciary Committee business would have ground to a halt if she had resigned.

OTOH we're not talking about using the 25A to end Joe Biden's presidency prematurely. If "they knew" he was in serious decline, it would be unconscionable to let him run for reelection. Nancy Pelosi goes down as one of the most effective House Speakers in the modern era. To think she would roll the dice on a Joe Biden who wasn't the same man as in 2020 doesn't really compute. And she wasn't fucking around when it was clearly time to pull the plug on the Joe Biden era in July.

And LOL at thinking Jill Biden was the master puppeteer. She had a say in Joe running again (how much? who knows), but Dem leadership wasn't asking Jill for marching orders.

I can't presume to know what exactly Pelosi and Schumer knew, and when they knew it. But they aren't fucking morons, and Democrat pols and most of us here knew the stakes of this election. I doubt any election will be as consequential for the rest of my life.

And LMAO at "candidate selection" being called trivial. It's no mere accident that DJT lost to an 82-year-old white man by 4.5%; but defeated a white woman that led polls wire to wire. And got more total votes than a Black woman. Kamala Harris was far from an optimal candidate to beat Trump, and it's weird that people can't concede that. I was happy to vote for Harris/Walz over the alternative, but I honestly don't even know how I feel that Harris has the CA governorship if she wants it. Let's not be dumb fucks and trot her out again in 2028 to lose to whatever shitbag Repugs offer up.

 

[Jaskalas]

Apples and oranges. Dems needed the corpse of Feinstein to get judges approved. Senate Judiciary Committee business would have ground to a halt if she had resigned.

OTOH we're not talking about using the 25A to end Joe Biden's presidency prematurely. If "they knew" he was in serious decline, it would be unconscionable to let him run for reelection. Nancy Pelosi goes down as one of the most effective House Speakers in the modern era. To think she would roll the dice on a Joe Biden who wasn't the same man as in 2020 doesn't really compute. And she wasn't fucking around when it was clearly time to pull the plug on the Joe Biden era in July.

The time to pull the plug on President Biden was 2023. Not July 2024.
Here's some info on why it may have taken a public outing at the last minute.
Because the White House was isolating Biden from everyone, including Congress.

WSJ BOMBSHELL: White House Hid Biden's Serious Decline from Public, Allies...

 

[gothuevos]

I respect a ton of what Pelosi has accomplished, especially compared to Chuck the Putz, but she can go fuck herself for this

View attachment 113135

Why do you still support them? They are not your friends.

 

[Gardener]

This was a very well written article about how the Dems really fucked up by letting these old fossils shut down AOC and the oversight committee ranking member. She had it in the bag too until the septuagenarians started getting all uppity.

Opinion | This is the worst time for Democrats to keep AOC on the backbench

In rejecting the New York congresswoman as ranking member of the Oversight Committee, Democrats sent a depressing message about their priorities.

www.msnbc.com

Hakeem Jeffries, the new Harry Reid.

 

[manly]

The time to pull the plug on President Biden was 2023. Not July 2024.
Here's some info on why it may have taken a public outing at the last minute.
Because the White House was isolating Biden from everyone, including Congress.

WSJ BOMBSHELL: White House Hid Biden's Serious Decline from Public, Allies...

That's a good report IMO, and bolsters what I've written above. Joe Biden is responsible for Joe Biden's failed reelection decision. And select people like Mike Donilon were a major part of that failure.

You could say that some other Washington "insiders" should have known better, but the WH went to great lengths to stage manage the fuck out of POTUS. Nobody outside of Biden's inner circle could have pulled the reelection plug back in 2023.

 

[MrSquished]

That's a good report IMO, and bolsters what I've written above. Joe Biden is responsible for Joe Biden's failed reelection decision. And select people like Mike Donilon were a major part of that failure.

You could say that some other Washington "insiders" should have known better, but the WH went to great lengths to stage manage the fuck out of POTUS. Nobody outside of Biden's inner circle could have pulled the reelection plug back in 2023.

I disagree. A lot of the public and outsider political junkies saw the decline from his already coddled appearances and even LESS access than these senior Dems - AND WE ALL SAW THE POLLING NUMBERS as well. The public didn't want him to run, his approval numbers were historically or close to historically bad for an incumbent, his own base didn't want him to run. They ignored all of this.

These Dems who are being absolved are supposed to be smart and insightful and doing what is best to save the country, not lay silent while the obvious is happening because they don't want to rock the boat.

The Democratic leadership failed miserably and completely and they are facing no repercussions for it.

 

[hal2kilo]

They knew. Just look at their actions regarding Dianne Feinstein. They thought they could control him, but Jill said NO.

That's apples and oranges. Senate is a special club with it's own set of problems.

 

[MrSquished]

I think Biden 's worst decision in the beginning of his presidency by far was picking Merrick Garland. If the justice department didn't wait until a year later when the January 6th committee kind of embarrassed him into looking into Trump, this would have been a whole different election and we'd likely have a Democratic president.

 

[ondma]

I think Biden 's worst decision in the beginning of his presidency by far was picking Merrick Garland. If the justice department didn't wait until a year later when the January 6th committee kind of embarrassed him into looking into Trump, this would have been a whole different election and we'd likely have a Democratic president.

I agree Garland was overly cautious, but would we though? The Jan 6 case was always problematical IMO. What exactly do you have to do to "incite an insurrection"? Certainly Trump was morally responsible for the unrest and anger that led to Jan 6. But did that rise to the level of being legally responsible? There was a lot of inflammatory rhetoric, but I don't know if there was really a "smoking gun" that would prove him guilty. I dont recall any evidence that Trump actually organized or financed the riots. It really came down to an attempt to prove intent, or failure to act in time to stop the riots, which is difficult. The election tampering and the "find me votes" in Georgia seemed to me to be the most provable all along.

And even if he had been convicted, chances are he could have delayed and filed appeals that would have allowed him to still run. And ultimately a conviction would probably have wound up in his handpicked Supreme Court. In reality, all the legal maneuvering accomplished was to play into the Republican victimhood agenda and to give us the immunity ruling which greatly enhances his power. Of course, one could argue a more aggressive attorney general would have gotten different results, but that is purely conjecture, and we will never know.

 

[MrSquished]

I agree Garland was overly cautious, but would we though? The Jan 6 case was always problematical IMO. What exactly do you have to do to "incite an insurrection"? Certainly Trump was morally responsible for the unrest and anger that led to Jan 6. But did that rise to the level of being legally responsible? There was a lot of inflammatory rhetoric, but I don't know if there was really a "smoking gun" that would prove him guilty. I dont recall any evidence that Trump actually organized or financed the riots. It really came down to an attempt to prove intent, or failure to act in time to stop the riots, which is difficult. The election tampering and the "find me votes" in Georgia seemed to me to be the most provable all along.

And even if he had been convicted, chances are he could have delayed and filed appeals that would have allowed him to still run. And ultimately a conviction would probably have wound up in his handpicked Supreme Court. In reality, all the legal maneuvering accomplished was to play into the Republican victimhood agenda and to give us the immunity ruling which greatly enhances his power. Of course, one could argue a more aggressive attorney general would have gotten different results, but that is purely conjecture, and we will never know.

The Jan 6th case and the classified documents case were two big ones. The Justice Dept fumbled both. Of course there is no guarantee of what would happened, but it is 100% a certainty that hemming and hawing on prosecuting those cases by a year was a colossal fuck up. There is no way around that answer. Merrick Garland was a fucking shitty shitty choice for AG. Period.

 

[fskimospy]

I agree Garland was overly cautious, but would we though? The Jan 6 case was always problematical IMO. What exactly do you have to do to "incite an insurrection"? Certainly Trump was morally responsible for the unrest and anger that led to Jan 6. But did that rise to the level of being legally responsible? There was a lot of inflammatory rhetoric, but I don't know if there was really a "smoking gun" that would prove him guilty. I dont recall any evidence that Trump actually organized or financed the riots. It really came down to an attempt to prove intent, or failure to act in time to stop the riots, which is difficult. The election tampering and the "find me votes" in Georgia seemed to me to be the most provable all along.

And even if he had been convicted, chances are he could have delayed and filed appeals that would have allowed him to still run. And ultimately a conviction would probably have wound up in his handpicked Supreme Court. In reality, all the legal maneuvering accomplished was to play into the Republican victimhood agenda and to give us the immunity ruling which greatly enhances his power. Of course, one could argue a more aggressive attorney general would have gotten different results, but that is purely conjecture, and we will never know.

The 1/6 case was not really about the attack on the Capitol, it was about the fake electors and attempts to pressure federal officials to overturn the results.

It was going to be a very easy case before the immunity ruling.

 

[ondma]

The 1/6 case was not really about the attack on the Capitol, it was about the fake electors and attempts to pressure federal officials to overturn the results.

It was going to be a very easy case before the immunity ruling.

I was considering "Jan 6" as the actual storming of the capitol, and trying to prosecute Trump for it. If you include the fake electors and pressuring of officials to "find me votes", yea, that seemed like the best chance. Looking back though, the attempted prosecutions, and even the attempted impeachments and the Jan 6 commission investigation backfired horribly. All they did was garner more support for Trump and give us the immunity ruling, which I fear is going to be a huge plus for Trumps revenge agenda.

 

[fskimospy]

I was considering "Jan 6" as the actual storming of the capitol, and trying to prosecute Trump for it. If you include the fake electors and pressuring of officials to "find me votes", yea, that seemed like the best chance.

That was the large majority of the actual case brought against Trump by Smith.

Looking back though, the attempted prosecutions, and even the attempted impeachments and the Jan 6 commission investigation backfired horribly. All they did was garner more support for Trump and give us the immunity ruling, which I fear is going to be a huge plus for Trumps revenge agenda.

I don’t get the logic here. How did the prosecution backfire? If you don’t prosecute Trump then he has immunity anyway because no one will enforce the law even when it’s someone attempting a coup.

 

[Moonbeam]

It looks to me like no matter what Democrats did or didn’t do to try to bring Trump to justice, no matter who they had as candidates, they would not have succeeded. I think the fact is that conservatives have enough power now to forcibly block the left from governing no matter what they do. American democracy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the rich. We are now a nation, of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich, one nation under Mammon, with amnesia, coma, and slavery for all.

Time for a police state, time for cowards to shine, down with the have nots, I got mine.

Gotta run. Don’t want to miss the latest dystopian Zombie horror series on Netflix.