Joe Biden talks about the election and the future of the party

[cubby1223]

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-biden-interview-20161222-story.html

And so as he sat in his office one day in October and watched footage of a Donald Trump rally in Wilkes-Barre, Pa., not far from his childhood home, Biden sensed trouble.

“Son of a gun. We may lose this election,” Biden said, recalling his reaction during an interview in his West Wing office.

“They’re all the people I grew up with. They’re their kids. And they’re not racist. They’re not sexist. But we didn’t talk to them.”

Smart people recognize truth. Much more than I can say for many regulars of this forum.

 

[Moonbeam]

Politicians are blinded by a desire to win and tongue tied for fear of giving offense, The constant focus on winning and not causing offense is a cage they put themselves in. When your only aim is to win, what message to the people can there be. Vote for me because I'm the next in line?

There is one problem in America that people can fix and that is to vote in a way that destroys the grip of the rich on our system. All the other crap people run on is horse shit. We got the response of idiot America to that problem, a vote for Donald Trump. What next?

And cubby, everybody thinks smart people are the people who have the same opinions as them.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Politicians are blinded by a desire to win and tongue tied for fear of giving offense, The constant focus on winning and not causing offense is a cage they put themselves in. When your only aim is to win, what message to the people can there be. Vote for me because I'm the next in line?

There is one problem in America that people can fix and that is to vote in a way that destroys the grip of the rich on our system. All the other crap people run on is horse shit. We got the response of idiot America to that problem, a vote for Donald Trump. What next?

And cubby, everybody thinks smart people are the people who have the same opinions as them.

This in an increasingly binary society where "the other guy" is always at fault. I posted in some of Joe's statements in another thread. Almost no one got it because that would require real inspection of something they were highly invested in. If I'm going to blame someone it's more us than Hillary or even Trump. Hillary couldn't really explain why people should vote for her. That the Party Faithful loved her doesn't matter to those who aren't loyalists. The Faithful have a choice- be fire and brimstone preachers yelling at ignorant sinners or change and understand that one needs empathy rather than judgement with damnation for disagreeing with the Holy Order. You can bring people into the House but not if you call them names. People have real fears and concerns. It matters not if one agrees with their perspectives but to them they genuine. Like Joe points out (and my respect for him has increased with his ability to honestly evaluate what happened) Hillary and the Dems can't afford to be so casual about the "great unwashed" as comes through too often.

The Dems need to change to be viable and looking down on those which did not support Hillary will land them in this same situation. Doing the wrong things harder just won't work.

Change is vital and change can happen but it's the hardest thing people can do. I was hoping Trump winning would provide motivation and the abandonment of circling wagons. Will they change? I can't say but looking around at this Democrat stronghold I'm less optimistic. They have very conservative minds, holding on to old ideas past their time. We shall see.

 

[Commodus]

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-biden-interview-20161222-story.html

Smart people recognize truth. Much more than I can say for many regulars of this forum.

Many Trump supporters aren't racist or sexist. But racists and sexists sure love Trump... and importantly, all Trump supporters clearly felt that policies encouraging this bigotry weren't the showstoppers they should be.

Think about it: the US is about to get its first modern President to be enthusiastically endorsed by the KKK, and whose first wife accused him of rape (on top of numerous other women's accusations of sexual assault). And yet, somehow, this was tolerable to just enough people in a few key states. (Note that I did not say the majority of Americans, because most American voters chose Clinton).

 

[Kazukian]

I've always enjoyed Joe's take on things, he seems like someone I'd like to sit down and have a beer with.

 

[desura]

Biden really should have run. He got turfed out by Hillary's people. He probably could have beaten Trump. Hillary has the discipline but she doesn't have the spirit.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Many Trump supporters aren't racist or sexist. But racists and sexists sure love Trump... and importantly, all Trump supporters clearly felt that policies encouraging this bigotry weren't the showstoppers they should be.

Think about it: the US is about to get its first modern President to be enthusiastically endorsed by the KKK, and whose first wife accused him of rape (on top of numerous other women's accusations of sexual assault). And yet, somehow, this was tolerable to just enough people in a few key states. (Note that I did not say the majority of Americans, because most American voters chose Clinton).

But that was the focus of the Democrats in large part, the "basket of deplorables", apology notwithstanding. So the KKK supported Trump? That's sad but not a basis for that supplanting Joe's points. As far as the voters choosing Clinton I suggest you step back and look at how many wanted her vs didn't. She posted second all time low in favorability. The more citizens saw "deplorables" in a basket, two to be precise. I shouldn't think much of one highly disliked candidate beating another regardless of party.

Will Dems take Joe to heart? Looking here probably not.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Biden really should have run. He got turfed out by Hillary's people. He probably could have beaten Trump. Hillary has the discipline but she doesn't have the spirit.

When Dems were lined up against Trump, Hillary came out worse than most including Bernie. Biden would have run away with the election being oh, human and all. I'd have picked him without any regret.

 

[Commodus]

But that was the focus of the Democrats in large part, the "basket of deplorables", apology notwithstanding. So the KKK supported Trump? That's sad but not a basis for that supplanting Joe's points. As far as the voters choosing Clinton I suggest you step back and look at how many wanted her vs didn't. She posted second all time low in favorability. The more citizens saw "deplorables" in a basket, two to be precise. I shouldn't think much of one highly disliked candidate beating another regardless of party.

Will Dems take Joe to heart? Looking here probably not.

I do agree with Biden that the party didn't really reach out to the audience it needed to. And Clinton shouldn't have said "basket of deplorables," full stop. It's true that Trump's ideology attracts bad people, but you always treat your potential voters with respect.

And yes, I've taken a step back. Nearly 2.9 million more people voted for Clinton over Trump. It's the widest ever popular vote lead for a losing US presidential candidate. The issue is not that most Americans didn't like her, although she wasn't nearly as endearing as Obama; it's that enough people didn't like her in certain states that her greater popularity over Trump didn't matter. And of course, this assumes that Republican disenfranchisement attempts didn't have their intended effect.

 

[Kazukian]

I do agree with Biden that the party didn't really reach out to the audience it needed to. And Clinton shouldn't have said "basket of deplorables," full stop. It's true that Trump's ideology attracts bad people, but you always treat your potential voters with respect.

And yes, I've taken a step back. Nearly 2.9 million more people voted for Clinton over Trump. It's the widest ever popular vote lead for a losing US presidential candidate. The issue is not that most Americans didn't like her, although she wasn't nearly as endearing as Obama; it's that enough people didn't like her in certain states that her greater popularity over Trump didn't matter. And of course, this assumes that Republican disenfranchisement attempts didn't have their intended effect.

I fail to understand using a metric that has no bearing of how our presidents are elected. California would vote for Charles Manson if he was the Dem nominee for POTUS

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I'm going to respectfully disagree on dislike not mattering. http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turnout-2016/

Clinton won the popular vote but overall participation was abysmal and I suggest that Biden's comments are relevant to the issue.

Look at the graph and you'll note that the Republicans didn't motivate voters either. Both Trump and Hillary would have lost to any candidate from 2000 forward. They were uninspiring candidates for the voter collective. Not dismissing your other points, but I'm saying that to believe the public not wanting a candidate is irrelevant or a minor consideration is a potentially fatal in an election. Clinton took the majority of votes in a boycotted election against the reprehensible Trump. Dems need to learn from this and I think the best starting point is to listen to Joe.

This is pretty much why I've been hammering on the Dems here. Not because I believe Trump to be superior, heavens he's a waking disaster, but to return to more noble roots. MLK would be shamed by the current crop as he wanted "all God's children" to find equality. All humans mattered and all had the right to dignity and consideration.

Both sides no longer really believe that.

 

[Commodus]

I fail to understand using a metric that has no bearing of how our presidents are elected. California would vote for Charles Manson if he was the Dem nominee for POTUS

I'm mainly taking issue with the implication that Clinton was wildly unpopular. She certainly wasn't as popular as Obama, but she was a rockstar next to Trump.

And I think you're being a bit hyperbolic with your POTUS comments. I understand what you mean, that the Democrats would be relatively lenient about their choice of leader, but something tells me the guy who wanted to start a race war and has a swastika on his forehead wouldn't be running as a Democrat.

 

[desura]

I'm mainly taking issue with the implication that Clinton was wildly unpopular. She certainly wasn't as popular as Obama, but she was a rockstar next to Trump.

And I think you're being a bit hyperbolic with your POTUS comments. I understand what you mean, that the Democrats would be relatively lenient about their choice of leader, but something tells me the guy who wanted to start a race war and has a swastika on his forehead wouldn't be running as a Democrat.

Clinton was a pretty bad candidate. Any generic Democrat candidate would have done well versus Trump. There was so much of people disliking Her that I saw that it was pretty clear she underperformed.

Martin OMalley could have won.

 

[Commodus]

Clinton was a pretty bad candidate. Any generic Democrat candidate would have done well versus Trump. There was so much of people disliking Her that I saw that it was pretty clear she underperformed.

Martin OMalley could have won.

I don't know about any generic candidate... O'Malley may have faced an uphill battle because no one really knew him. Sanders? Maybe, assuming he wasn't too polarizing. I think he was better policy-wise than Clinton, but might have freaked out some centrists. Biden might have been best if just because he would not only had Obama's vibe rub off on him, but his own distinct mix of charisma, intelligence and nuanced liberalism.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I suggest four words which would remove the problem of inadequate candidates.

On every Presidential election (other offices perhaps) we have one "person" who always appears on the ballot, Mr/Ms "None of the Above"

Should M. "A" win against the competetion all participating parties have 30 days to bring aboard a completely new slate of choices. Yes that is short notice and intentionally onerous. If the parties involved bring in choices the voters rather not have we rinse and repeat.

Since both parties are donkeys we need a good solid stick. Even they will learn that there are minimum standards as determined by the general electorate to which they must adhere.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

When Dems were lined up against Trump, Hillary came out worse than most including Bernie. Biden would have run away with the election being oh, human and all. I'd have picked him without any regret.

I would have voted for Biden as well. I wrote in John Kasich rather than vote for Trump.

 

[JSt0rm]

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-biden-interview-20161222-story.html



Smart people recognize truth. Much more than I can say for many regulars of this forum.

Thank you for starting this thread by putting everyone on the defensive. I posted almost the same thing 3 days after the election.

 

[JSt0rm]

I'm going to respectfully disagree on dislike not mattering. http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turnout-2016/

Clinton won the popular vote but overall participation was abysmal and I suggest that Biden's comments are relevant to the issue.

Look at the graph and you'll note that the Republicans didn't motivate voters either. Both Trump and Hillary would have lost to any candidate from 2000 forward. They were uninspiring candidates for the voter collective. Not dismissing your other points, but I'm saying that to believe the public not wanting a candidate is irrelevant or a minor consideration is a potentially fatal in an election. Clinton took the majority of votes in a boycotted election against the reprehensible Trump. Dems need to learn from this and I think the best starting point is to listen to Joe.

This is pretty much why I've been hammering on the Dems here. Not because I believe Trump to be superior, heavens he's a waking disaster, but to return to more noble roots. MLK would be shamed by the current crop as he wanted "all God's children" to find equality. All humans mattered and all had the right to dignity and consideration.

Both sides no longer really believe that.

If only the Russians didn't drag Hillary through the mud, we could of avoided the incoming Great Depression 2.0

 

[Double Trouble]

I do agree with Biden that the party didn't really reach out to the audience it needed to. And Clinton shouldn't have said "basket of deplorables," full stop. It's true that Trump's ideology attracts bad people, but you always treat your potential voters with respect.

Calling them deplorables wasn't the real problem, that was just a manifestation of the underlying sentiment that still has not changed. You can see it here every day. Trump trash, rednecks, racists, bigots, you name it. That is how many continue to view anyone who supported Trump or didn't support Hillary. Biden is right on with his comments. They failed to reach a wide swath of people and even antagonized them by calling them names. They failed to realize that a lot of good people had big misgivings about Hillary, the democrats assumed those people would just fall into line because of how bad Trump is.

I'd have voted for Biden in a heartbeat over Trump and Hillary, even though I'm a conservative and disagree with his politics.

Nearly 2.9 million more people voted for Clinton over Trump. It's the widest ever popular vote lead for a losing US presidential candidate. The issue is not that most Americans didn't like her, although she wasn't nearly as endearing as Obama; it's that enough people didn't like her in certain states that her greater popularity over Trump didn't matter. And of course, this assumes that Republican disenfranchisement attempts didn't have their intended effect.

Meaningless metric is meaningless.

I'm mainly taking issue with the implication that Clinton was wildly unpopular. She certainly wasn't as popular as Obama, but she was a rockstar next to Trump.

Consider this though. She ran against the most unpopular candidste in history. He should have been trounced, but yet the turnout was terribly low for her. That shows that she was also deeply unpopular. Even with all the "i can't vote for Trump, he's a disaster!" votes, she still got far fewer votes than prior candidates. She was a hot mess, and possibly one of the few who could have lost to Trump.

 

[JSt0rm]

she didnt call every human in the rust belt a deplorable. She was talking directly about the alt right. It was spun like that. She shouldnt of said it because of the spin not because it wasnt true.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Dang formatting

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

If only the Russians didn't drag Hillary through the mud, we could of avoided the incoming Great Depression 2.0

The Russians should not have hacked the DNC. Likewise nothing untrue was revealed but the behavior of the organization and politicians was exposed. Two wrongs revealed.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

she didnt call every human in the rust belt a deplorable. She was talking directly about the alt right. It was spun like that. She shouldnt of said it because of the spin not because it wasnt true.

This is why Hillary lost. There are a lot of people who went for Trump for a great many reasons. Based on some impossible to determine metric she and you decided that half of them are deplorable.

OK. Half of Hillary's supporters are too. Why not? I mean if baseless denigration is a thing then I can apply it too.

Complete foolishness. You will lose again which is pretty much what Biden is trying to tell you.

 

[JSt0rm]

did I say half? When did I say half? This is the problem. Filing in facts and repeating them.

 

[JSt0rm]

also I dont win or lose based on who is in charge. Im a white male who makes 6 figures in the united states. I already won.