Has U.S. Democracy Been Trumped?

[johnu]

Maybe you missed it :rolleyes: but my response is directly to posts in this thread - 15173 for example. If Barry wants to go through and remove the sub-threads within this one to the coronavirus one then he is welcome to :lol: but in the meantime I will try to keep my posts to the thread I am responding to rather than set up some kind of cross-threaded feedback.

Did you know that when you hit Reply in response to a post that the post you are replying to appears as a quote? :rolleyes: That way, others don't have to try to figure out what you are talking about if you aren't obviously directly replying to the previous thread.

 

Whatever, I stand by my previous comments.

[kenberg]

I had no trouble at all understanding what Zel was referring to in his comment and I agree, I am appalled by the campaign ads from both camps. I am confident that I am far from alone in this. And of course it is far from the first time that I hear (the start of) a campaign ad and wonder who wrote it and who on earth takes it as a serious statement. Long ago Adlai Stevenson was told that he is the intelligent person's candidate and he replied yes, but he needed a majority. These ad writers have taken this comment to heart.

 

See https://newrepublic....ng-attack-trump for an assessment of one of Biden's ads. The writer gets paid to watch such stuff, I don't.

[kenberg]

Here is a thought about getting people to understand Trump and what's at stake. I would like to see several governors call Pence and say "I understand from the president that you can get me half a million test kits at a price much better than what Hogan paid, I would like to go with that". Then we will see what happens. Maybe they will get the kits, that would be great. Or, if not, we will have a clear picture of DT as a slinger of BS. Hogan has already explained that he was aware of federal testing facilities in Maryland such as the NIH and he would be happy to have the Vice-Presidents help in getting them to do dome testing. We will see how that goes.

 

Yes, a different president , virtually any other president, would have been out in front on this. But we have Trump. For now he is. There are a great many very straightforward ways to illustrate Trump's total incompetence. But I hope we can also find ways to illustrate why we would be pleased with Biden. He does not have to be the best president ever. But better than Trump? That's a very low bar.

[y66]

Nicholas Fandos and Julian E. Barnes at NYT: Republican-Led Review Backs Intelligence Findings on Russian Interference

 

WASHINGTON — For years, President Trump has derided the assessment by American intelligence officials that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to assist his candidacy, dismissing it without evidence as the work of a “deep state” out to undermine his victory.

 

But on Tuesday, a long-awaited Senate review led by members of Mr. Trump’s own party effectively undercut those allegations. A three-year review by the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee unanimously found that the intelligence community assessment, pinning blame on Russia and outlining its goals to undercut American democracy, was fundamentally sound and untainted by politics.

The committee is expected to release a final bipartisan installment in the coming months evaluating possible coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia. A draft runs over 900 pages but has yet to be submitted for classification review by intelligence agencies, a process that could take weeks or months.

 

The findings are likely to mirror those in the Mueller report. His team documented voluminous contacts between Russia and the Trump campaign, including a willingness by Mr. Trump’s team to accept Russian assistance during the election, but concluded that it had insufficient evidence to charge any campaign official with conspiracy.

[y66]

re: Trump’s plan to limit immigration to the U.S.:

 

“Well, I don’t necessarily agree with it, but it is probably the safest thing for the immigrants. Because right now, America is basically a petri dish on the floor of a bus station men’s room.”

[Winstonm]

Here is a thought about getting people to understand Trump and what's at stake. I would like to see several governors call Pence and say "I understand from the president that you can get me half a million test kits at a price much better than what Hogan paid, I would like to go with that". Then we will see what happens. Maybe they will get the kits, that would be great. Or, if not, we will have a clear picture of DT as a slinger of BS. Hogan has already explained that he was aware of federal testing facilities in Maryland such as the NIH and he would be happy to have the Vice-Presidents help in getting them to do dome testing. We will see how that goes.

 

Yes, a different president , virtually any other president, would have been out in front on this. But we have Trump. For now he is. There are a great many very straightforward ways to illustrate Trump's total incompetence. But I hope we can also find ways to illustrate why we would be pleased with Biden. He does not have to be the best president ever. But better than Trump? That's a very low bar.

I think the key to Biden winning is for him to convince Michelle Obama to be his running mate.

[Winstonm]

From the WaPo:

 

The ads on Facebook sounded populist and passionate: “The people are rising up against these insane shutdowns,” they said. “We’re fighting back to demand that our elected officials reopen America.”

 

But the posts, funded by an initiative called “Convention of States,” were not the product of a grass-roots uprising alone. Instead, they represented one salvo in a wide-ranging and well-financed conservative campaign to undermine restrictions that medical experts say are necessary to contain the coronavirus — but that protesters call overkill and whose economic fallout could damage President Trump’s political prospects.

 

A network of right-leaning individuals and groups, aided by nimble online outfits, has helped incubate the fervor erupting in state capitals across the country. The activism is often organic and the frustration deeply felt, but it is also being amplified, and in some cases coordinated, by longtime conservative activists, whose robust operations were initially set up with help from Republican megadonors.

 

Not grass roots but rich roots.

[y66]

 

Story: https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2020/04/21/icu-nurse-who-stood-masked-and-silent-rally-open-arizona/3001723001/

[barmar]

Maybe you missed it :rolleyes: but there is actually an entire thread devoted entirely to the Coronavirus pandemic

 

Maybe you missed it :rolleyes: but my response is directly to posts in this thread - 15173 for example. If Barry wants to go through and remove the sub-threads within this one to the coronavirus one then he is welcome to :lol: but in the meantime I will try to keep my posts to the thread I am responding to rather than set up some kind of cross-threaded feedback.

As far as I'm concerned, discussion of Trump's handling of the pandemic are appropriate to either thread, and often fit better here. The coronavirus thread is more about the pandemic in general, not the US political issues surrounding it.

[johnu]

I had no trouble at all understanding what Zel was referring to in his comment and I agree, I am appalled by the campaign ads from both camps. I am confident that I am far from alone in this. And of course it is far from the first time that I hear (the start of) a campaign ad and wonder who wrote it and who on earth takes it as a serious statement. Long ago Adlai Stevenson was told that he is the intelligent person's candidate and he replied yes, but he needed a majority. These ad writers have taken this comment to heart.

 

See https://newrepublic....ng-attack-trump for an assessment of one of Biden's ads. The writer gets paid to watch such stuff, I don't.

I'm sure you will agree with me that over the course of a (now) 7 month presidential campaign between the 2 major contenders that the focus is going to be scattered among various topics at different times.

 

I'm not implying that I like that Biden China-centric ad in that article, but I can see where somebody in Biden's campaign thought is was a good idea (whether or not it actually a well executed idea) to punch back. The Racist in Chief had run several (racist) ads against Biden trying to link him to nefarious goings on in China, including showing him standing next to an Asian (which was actually Gary Locke, former governor of Washington) in front of an American flag in an apparent attempt to portray Biden as unpatriotic and in China's pocket. Classic deflection by the Grifter in Chief when China has loaned his company hundreds of millions and his daughter is doing millions of dollars of business in China. Rather than let the deceptive ads fester in the public mind for months, the Biden campaign produces a counter attack ad to a big lie.

 

The Big Lie:

 

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie.

[kenberg]

I'm sure you will agree with me that over the course of a (now) 7 month presidential campaign between the 2 major contenders that the focus is going to be scattered among various topics at different times.

 

I'm not implying that I like that Biden China-centric ad in that article, but I can see where somebody in Biden's campaign thought is was a good idea (whether or not it actually a well executed idea) to punch back. The Racist in Chief had run several (racist) ads against Biden trying to link him to nefarious goings on in China, including showing him standing next to an Asian (which was actually Gary Locke, former governor of Washington) in front of an American flag in an apparent attempt to portray Biden as unpatriotic and in China's pocket. Classic deflection by the Grifter in Chief when China has loaned his company hundreds of millions and his daughter is doing millions of dollars of business in China. Rather than let the deceptive ads fester in the public mind for months, the Biden campaign produces a counter attack ad to a big lie.

 

The Big Lie:

 

 

 

 

I expect the upcoming election to be worse than any in my lifetime. Ugly, full of BS, you name it. What to do?

 

As a general approach, I recommend simplicity. Let's take one of your examples. Trump's daughter is doing millions in business in China. Well, could be. I could say sure, that's true, but I have never checked into it. But so? If it should turn out she is giving all of her China profits to charity, hardly likely, I would still be just as opposed to Trump as I am now.

It will certainly not affect my vote. Or anyone's.

Trump ;loves this. Someone goes off on Trump citing the money his daughter is making in China, the intended audience tunes out, Trump wins a round.

 

People are dying, doctors, nurses and others are working in dangerous circumstances. This is something people understand and they grieve over it. Trump has no idea what he is doing, absolutely no idea. Sure, a case might very well be made that this is partly a result of his financial interests. But the simpler version is that he is the president and he is doing a lousy job. Greed or stupidity, probably both, but he is doing a lousy job.

 

So we need someone to replace him Someone competent. Brilliant would be good, competent is necessary. We can hope for highly competent. I suggest that everyone involved in the Biden campaign keep this in mind.

 

People have a tolerance for bootleggers but not for incompetent bootleggers. When the whiskey starts killing people then a change will happen.

[Winstonm]

I'm convinced this red state ploy of reopening is not about Covid-19 but about screwing as many as they can out of unemployment benefits.

[akwoo]

So we need someone to replace him Someone competent. Brilliant would be good, competent is necessary. We can hope for highly competent. I suggest that everyone involved in the Biden campaign keep this in mind.

 

People have a tolerance for bootleggers but not for incompetent bootleggers. When the whiskey starts killing people then a change will happen.

 

One of the things Trump is counting on - probably because he himself is such a person - is for people to believe that competence is actually impossible.

 

The future is unpredictable. You can't ever know what's going on or ever know how what you do will affect the future. Everyone is making their best guess and hoping it works out, and no one's guess is actually more grounded in reason than any other, because all reason is just made up BS.

 

The sadly depressing conclusion I've come to in a few years of teaching math at a university in a poor state with not so good K-12 education is that many people, perhaps a majority, simply don't have the cognitive faculties to engage in even basic reasoning, and can't attach any meaning to abstract ideas or predictions of the future. Some such people come to realize that other people do have such abilities, but most believe everyone is just as incapable as they are.

[johnu]

As a general approach, I recommend simplicity. Let's take one of your examples. Trump's daughter is doing millions in business in China. Well, could be. I could say sure, that's true, but I have never checked into it. But so? If it should turn out she is giving all of her China profits to charity, hardly likely, I would still be just as opposed to Trump as I am now.

It will certainly not affect my vote. Or anyone's.

You say it won't affect your vote. Sure, based on your posts in this thread, you were never going to vote for the Grifter in Chief so of course it won't affect your vote.

 

If you don't know the Grifter's daughter had done millions of business in China (and blatantly appeared to get preferential Chinese trademarks based on who her father is), how is somebody who doesn't watch or read any news (or just sporadically) going to know? The Manchurian President is running ads suggesting that Biden's son was making money in China by cashing in on his father's name. It's messy, but calling out the Grifter's family is just using fire to fight fire.

 

You may not like it, but the fact of the matter is that politicians' use negative ads because they work.

 

Maybe any particular ad may start to change the minds of just a few hundred voters. The accumulation of ads may change thousands or tens of thousands of swing votes in a state. Looking at the razor thin margins in many of the swing states, you can't overlook any of the swing voters, and you need to make sure your own party voters are motivated to take the time to vote.

[kenberg]

You say it won't affect your vote. Sure, based on your posts in this thread, you were never going to vote for the Grifter in Chief so of course it won't affect your vote.

 

If you don't know the Grifter's daughter had done millions of business in China (and blatantly appeared to get preferential Chinese trademarks based on who her father is), how is somebody who doesn't watch or read any news (or just sporadically) going to know? The Manchurian President is running ads suggesting that Biden's son was making money in China by cashing in on his father's name. It's messy, but calling out the Grifter's family is just using fire to fight fire.

 

You may not like it, but the fact of the matter is that politicians' use negative ads because they work.

 

Maybe any particular ad may start to change the minds of just a few hundred voters. The accumulation of ads may change thousands or tens of thousands of swing votes in a state. Looking at the razor thin margins in many of the swing states, you can't overlook any of the swing voters, and you need to make sure your own party voters are motivated to take the time to vote.

 

I will perhaps come back to this after I have more coffee. Defeating Trump is important.

 

"You may not like it, but the fact of the matter is that politicians' use negative ads because they work"

True, I don't like it. But otoh I think negative campaigning can be appropriate. The lack of presidential leadership in the covid crisis is appalling. I think that it is both right and effective for Biden to make this a point of his campaign. We need people to believe that in the next national crisis we would rather have Biden than Trump at the helm, but negative campaigning only does half the job. Trump bad, yes, Biden good, this is needed also.

 

Psychologists would say, and I believe it is obvious anyway, that our adult views are influenced by the world we grew up in. I hope I have matured some since then but let's look for a moment at the 1952 race between Eisenhower and Stevenson. I was 13. I recall coming home from a Boy Scout meeting and seeing Joe McCarthy on the tv, explaining that in the 1930s Stevenson belonged to groups that were now on the Attorney General's list of subversive organization. I though McCarthy was full of crap. Eisenhower said "I will go to Korea". This was brilliant. Brief and to the point. People were very fed up with the war, aka the police action, in Korea and they understood Eisenhower to be saying "I will take care of this". They believed him. My father belonged to the carpenter's union and I am pretty sure that he, usually voted D just as the union suggested. But I am pretty sure he voter for Ike in 52. In 56 i believe he reverted to his usually D voting. And I at least hope that the 52 vote for Ike, by my father and many others, was much more based on "I will go to Korea" than on any of McCarthy's nonsense.

 

My main point is that neither of my parents, nor the other adults I was regularly in contact with, had any deep interest in the details of politics. The message needed to be brief and to the point. "I will go to Korea" fits this very well and Ike won easily.

 

Application to 2020: Never mind analyzing the details of why Trump did, and is continuing to do, such a shoddy job with covid. The essential points (two essential points) should be (1) that DT has screwed up big time and (2) JB has a history that gives us reasonable confidence he would do much better. The first should be easy. The last will require some thought. In 52 the Korean war had reached a stalemate, boys were being killed without the battle lines much moving either north or south, it was clear something substantial had to be done. And Ike, well, D-day was not that long ago. So yes, an easy choice. Biden has no D-Day to refer to but the campaign needs to show Biden is the guy we want in a crisis, whatever the unexpected crisis might be. Short and simple is needed. My father preferred to discuss fishing.

 

Short version: Keep the audience in mind. What is important to them?

[Winstonm]

I will perhaps come back to this after I have more coffee. Defeating Trump is important.

 

"You may not like it, but the fact of the matter is that politicians' use negative ads because they work"

True, I don't like it. But otoh I think negative campaigning can be appropriate. The lack of presidential leadership in the covid crisis is appalling. I think that it is both right and effective for Biden to make this a point of his campaign. We need people to believe that in the next national crisis we would rather have Biden than Trump at the helm, but negative campaigning only does half the job. Trump bad, yes, Biden good, this is needed also.

 

Psychologists would say, and I believe it is obvious anyway, that our adult views are influenced by the world we grew up in. I hope I have matured some since then but let's look for a moment at the 1952 race between Eisenhower and Stevenson. I was 13. I recall coming home from a Boy Scout meeting and seeing Joe McCarthy on the tv, explaining that in the 1930s Stevenson belonged to groups that were now on the Attorney General's list of subversive organization. I though McCarthy was full of crap. Eisenhower said "I will go to Korea". This was brilliant. Brief and to the point. People were very fed up with the war, aka the police action, in Korea and they understood Eisenhower to be saying "I will take care of this". They believed him. My father belonged to the carpenter's union and I am pretty sure that he, usually voted D just as the union suggested. But I am pretty sure he voter for Ike in 52. In 56 i believe he reverted to his usually D voting. And I at least hope that the 52 vote for Ike, by my father and many others, was much more based on "I will go to Korea" than on any of McCarthy's nonsense.

 

My main point is that neither of my parents, nor the other adults I was regularly in contact with, had any deep interest in the details of politics. The message needed to be brief and to the point. "I will go to Korea" fits this very well and Ike won easily.

 

Application to 2020: Never mind analyzing the details of why Trump did, and is continuing to do, such a shoddy job with covid. The essential points (two essential points) should be (1) that DT has screwed up big time and (2) JB has a history that gives us reasonable confidence he would do much better. The first should be easy. The last will require some thought. In 52 the Korean war had reached a stalemate, boys were being killed without the battle lines much moving either north or south, it was clear something substantial had to be done. And Ike, well, D-day was not that long ago. So yes, an easy choice. Biden has no D-Day to refer to but the campaign needs to show Biden is the guy we want in a crisis, whatever the unexpected crisis might be. Short and simple is needed. My father preferred to discuss fishing.

 

Short version: Keep the audience in mind. What is important to them?

 

Trust Trump and be a chump; Trusting Joe's the way to go.

Biden ain't Lyin'

[Winstonm]

Speaking of elections, the WaPo has an interesting piece today that bodes poorly for Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/cable-news-stars-like-hannity-make-headlines-but-more-people-are-watching-david-muirs-abc-newscast/2020/04/22/f45fefb2-83fd-11ea-878a-86477a724bdb_story.html

 

April 23, 2020 at 6:17 a.m. CDT

NEW YORK —

 

I asked a media-savvy friend recently to guess what is the most-watched program on TV right now.

 

“Hannity’s show?” she offered.

 

It’s “World News Tonight” on ABC, I told her. “You know, with David Muir?”

 

A blank look followed.

 

It’s true. As news-hungry viewers seek credible information on the coronavirus pandemic, the ratings for ABC’s weeknight newscast is not only beating the likes of Sean Hannity on Fox News but also favorites like “The Voice,” “NCIS” and “60 Minutes.”

 

The other evening news programs — anchored by NBC’s Lester Holt and CBS’s Norah O’Donnell — are also on a roll.

 

Gee, people searching for information rather than propaganda - who wudda thought?

[johnu]

I will perhaps come back to this after I have more coffee. Defeating Trump is important.

 

"You may not like it, but the fact of the matter is that politicians' use negative ads because they work"

True, I don't like it. But otoh I think negative campaigning can be appropriate. The lack of presidential leadership in the covid crisis is appalling. I think that it is both right and effective for Biden to make this a point of his campaign. We need people to believe that in the next national crisis we would rather have Biden than Trump at the helm, but negative campaigning only does half the job. Trump bad, yes, Biden good, this is needed also.

The heart of the presidential campaigning doesn't normally start until August when the 2 national party conventions have been completed. Biden is not even the "official" candidate until he gets a majority vote of the Democrat delegates, and he hasn't even chosen a VP candidate.

 

Biden has actually put out some positive policy statements and given constructive advice on how he would have handled the Coronavirus pandemic. But he's not really spending any significant amount of ad money this far out from the election, and he doesn't have a national TV platform for 2 hour a day like the Grifter to soak up much of the daily news cycles. Since one of Biden's advantages is that he is considered to be a "nice" guy with a very solid background in government, you can expect much more positive ads once we get into the late summer months.

[shyams]

Application to 2020: Never mind analyzing the details of why Trump did, and is continuing to do, such a shoddy job with covid. The essential points (two essential points) should be (1) that DT has screwed up big time and (2) JB has a history that gives us reasonable confidence he would do much better. The first should be easy. The last will require some thought. In 52 the Korean war had reached a stalemate, boys were being killed without the battle lines much moving either north or south, it was clear something substantial had to be done. And Ike, well, D-day was not that long ago. So yes, an easy choice. Biden has no D-Day to refer to but the campaign needs to show Biden is the guy we want in a crisis, whatever the unexpected crisis might be. Short and simple is needed. My father preferred to discuss fishing.

 

Short version: Keep the audience in mind. What is important to them?

Note: I'm not a US Citizen or resident, I cannot vote.

I agree with (1) that your Great President is a clown and has screwed up big time. However, he is not the only world leader to have screwed up on this matter. Your senators and representatives have screwed up as well... really badly. So there are many people to blame for the bad situation and Trump will probably get away without bearing all of the blame for this.

 

I don't know what you folks find good about Biden. He has a track record of selling out to corporate interests (I'm not referring to his son), he doesn't have a strong record of suggesting citizen-friendly policies, and finally some of his rambling responses suggest an absence of coherent thought. And if you think the rambling responses aren't a concern, my guess is that this one factor alone will be exploited by Trump, the Republicans and those Super PACs to ensure that Trump is reelected.

 

In summary, I think Biden makes a poor candidate to oppose Trump in the Presidential elections.

[hrothgar]

 

I don't know what you folks find good about Biden. He has a track record of selling out to corporate interests (I'm not referring to his son), he doesn't have a strong record of suggesting citizen-friendly policies, and finally some of his rambling responses suggest an absence of coherent thought. And if you think the rambling responses aren't a concern, my guess is that this one factor alone will be exploited by Trump, the Republicans and those Super PACs to ensure that Trump is reelected.

 

 

Biden is far from perfect.

 

I would have far preferred if Warren, Klobuchar, Buttageig, ... had been the candidate. However, if is ridiculous to think that he isn't orders of magnitude than Trump

 

In summary, I think Biden makes a poor candidate to oppose Trump in the Presidential elections.

 

Who do you think would have been a better candidate in the general election and, more importantly, how is this claim consistent with that candidates inability to execute during the Democratic primary?

[awm]

I don’t think Biden would be the best president, but he might be a good candidate. Elections with an incumbent president are mostly referendums on his performance. Trump is a lousy president, he’s been unpopular his whole term, and now we have an avoidable disaster killing Americans and crashing the economy on his watch.

 

All we need is a candidate that won’t have some of the many voters who dislike Trump saying: “Trump is lousy but this Democratic candidate scares me.” A candidate who is an older white male with lots of governing experience and mostly pledges to return to the “status quo pre-Trump” seems unlikely to scare off any of these voters. Even Republicans (those few who don’t love Trump) seem pretty comfortable with Biden.

[shyams]

Who do you think would have been a better candidate in the general election and, more importantly, how is this claim consistent with that candidates inability to execute during the Democratic primary?

Probably some of the candidates you named -- Warren, Klobuchar -- or even Sanders (if the Dem establishment could somehow accept such a hard-left candidate). Even a left-field candidate like Cuomo might be better.

 

As for the Dem primaries, is it really a fair fight? The only way Mayor Pete or Senator Bernie would ever actually succeed would be if they were obnoxious and thick-skinned like Trump was during the 2016 Rep primaries. I wouldn't be too surprised if the Republican establishment had tried to derail Trump's candidacy during the early days of the 2016 primaries --- only that he browbeat every fellow Republican into submission.

 

And as for Biden (reference to awm's post) and "return to the status quo pre-Trump" isn't the average American voter worried about back-seat driving by the Obamas or by Mrs. Biden (a la Edith Wilson)?

[Winstonm]

I don’t think Biden would be the best president, but he might be a good candidate. Elections with an incumbent president are mostly referendums on his performance. Trump is a lousy president, he’s been unpopular his whole term, and now we have an avoidable disaster killing Americans and crashing the economy on his watch.

 

All we need is a candidate that won’t have some of the many voters who dislike Trump saying: “Trump is lousy but this Democratic candidate scares me.” A candidate who is an older white male with lots of governing experience and mostly pledges to return to the “status quo pre-Trump” seems unlikely to scare off any of these voters. Even Republicans (those few who don’t love Trump) seem pretty comfortable with Biden.

I agree. Because it is such a hurdle to defeat an incumbent president to begin with, now is not the time to bring out the big-ticket progressive platform for referendum. First things first. Rid us of Trump. Take back the Senate. Keep control of the House. Two years down the road or even 4 years, then might be the time to take a swing at the fences.

[hrothgar]

Probably some of the candidates you named -- Warren, Klobuchar -- or even Sanders (if the Dem establishment could somehow accept such a hard-left candidate). Even a left-field candidate like Cuomo might be better.

 

None of the candidates that you suggested were able to attract any kind of significant support during the Democratic primaries. And, for better or worse, elections in the United States are won by individuals who are able to convince their supporters to show up at the polls a vote.

 

As for the Dem primaries, is it really a fair fight?

 

Yes, it is.

 

The system can certainly be improved, however not producing the result that you/I would prefer doesn't invalidate the process

[johnu]

Note: I'm not a US Citizen or resident, I cannot vote.

I agree with (1) that your Great President is a clown and has screwed up big time. However, he is not the only world leader to have screwed up on this matter. Your senators and representatives have screwed up as well... really badly. So there are many people to blame for the bad situation and Trump will probably get away without bearing all of the blame for this.

I give you credit for correctly identifying and naming the Clown President. To the extent that Congress has screwed up, it is in the lack of ironclad oversight on the relief money in the Coronavirus bills that have been passed. As a basic principle, Congress has very little say in the Federal response to national emergencies besides budgeting money. The president controls all the Federal agencies as well as the Defense Production Act. The president also has the bully pulpit to sway public opinion. It is telling that while other presidents saw their favorable ratings reach into the 80% range during disasters, the Clown in Chief has seen his favorable ratings drop down to his core supporters, ie. in the low 40% range.

 

From diminishing the coronavirus threat for months, to the refusal to take supercharge and take control of the PPE supply chain, to appointing unqualified people to lead key positions in trying to stop the virus, to spreading misinformation about the virus every single day of week, to undermining health officials, state and local officials, and even contradicting himself, sometimes the same day, the Grifter in Chief has the overwhelming blame for US failures. Almost everybody else has only trace percentages of blame.

 

I don't know what you folks find good about Biden. He has a track record of selling out to corporate interests (I'm not referring to his son), he doesn't have a strong record of suggesting citizen-friendly policies, and finally some of his rambling responses suggest an absence of coherent thought. And if you think the rambling responses aren't a concern, my guess is that this one factor alone will be exploited by Trump, the Republicans and those Super PACs to ensure that Trump is reelected.

 

In summary, I think Biden makes a poor candidate to oppose Trump in the Presidential elections.

I was not a Biden supporter in the primaries. Still, at least now, Biden appears to be the strongest possible Democratic candidate because he has consistently polled the best against the Manchurian President, even before he entered the Democratic primary. He polled from better to much better than any of the 25+ other candidates who were running in the primary.

 

As we know, polls predict elections, but they can be wrong, as they were in 2016. Still, any Democratic candidate who beats the Grifter In Chief is a great candidate in my view.