Sleepy Joe could be getting impeached!!

[silentkisser]

Here's the thing: The right are melting down because Biden said something a little wonky, yet they gave pass after pass after all the stupid incoherent shit Trump said. Now, I'm not sure if Biden will last until 2028. That'a long time. He'd be 86. But, for a man of his years, he doesn't seem to have a significant metal decline. But, lets face it, he's a stroke away from being a vegetable. But so is Trump, who isn't that much younger. It will be interesting to see how the stress of multiple indictments will be on him.

All that being said....I wonder why the GOP is so committed to Trump. Since he won in 2016, he's been linked to every significant defeat the GOP faced. They couldn't even really get a huge majority in 2022 when all signs were pointing to a red wave...They lost control of the senate, and have only a slim majority. And from what the so-called "experts" say, he'll probably lose to whomever the Dems run.

 

[six_pac]

So curious what democrats/Liberals here think of their leaders(whole party agenda) how well are they doing, are they worth supporting etc..

 

[mitchell76]

Here's the thing: The right are melting down because Biden said something a little wonky, yet they gave pass after pass after all the stupid incoherent shit Trump said. Now, I'm not sure if Biden will last until 2028. That'a long time. He'd be 86. But, for a man of his years, he doesn't seem to have a significant metal decline. But, lets face it, he's a stroke away from being a vegetable. But so is Trump, who isn't that much younger. It will be interesting to see how the stress of multiple indictments will be on him.

All that being said....I wonder why the GOP is so committed to Trump. Since he won in 2016, he's been linked to every significant defeat the GOP faced. They couldn't even really get a huge majority in 2022 when all signs were pointing to a red wave...They lost control of the senate, and have only a slim majority. And from what the so-called "experts" say, he'll probably lose to whomever the Dems run.

Biden is the worst president in US history, and definitely has dementia. Whereas Trump is totally coherent, and with it. The problem the Dems have, is that if they get rid of Biden, then they have to nominate Kamala, who is even worse than Biden---LOL

That's why the Dems are indicting Trump left, right, and center, because they realize that Biden is a total loser!! That's why the Dems are hoping Covid gets worse again, so they can keep Biden locked away in his basement, like the Dems did in 2020. Also, if covid gets worse, then the Dems can institute, those fraudulent mail in ballots again!!

 

[mandrill]

I think the issue now is will Biden do a 90 and walk into a wall.

I have been very consistent on this for a long time. I don't see how he gets to November 2024 without the entire country seeing the problem with his advancing age. The rigors of a campaign will make that more painfully obvious.

Trump has degenerated quite noticeably too. But no rightie appears to regard that as a problem. Why is that?

 

[WyattEarp]

Trump has degenerated quite noticeably too. But no rightie appears to regard that as a problem. Why is that?

I have a problem with it. Trump's outsized personality has crossed a tipping point. The lack of a filter and idiosyncrasies becoming magnified seem to be signs of advanced aging.

Of course, we can run an impaired Biden because Trump is degenerating seems like a dangerous political strategy.

 

[mandrill]

I have a problem with it. Trump's outsized personality has crossed a tipping point. The lack of a filter and idiosyncrasies becoming magnified seem to be signs of advanced aging.

Of course, we can run an impaired Biden because Trump is degenerating seems like a dangerous political strategy.

Everybody I know wishes that Biden would step aside too. The one consolation appears to be that Biden - or at least his team - appears to be still effective at getting things done. But it's hardly satisfactory.

 

[WyattEarp]

Everybody I know wishes that Biden would step aside too. The one consolation appears to be that Biden - or at least his team - appears to be still effective at getting things done. But it's hardly satisfactory.

Some of us have corporate and large institutional experience (not suggesting you don't). We know personally how weak "CEOs" can muddy the decision-making process and how different factions can take advantage pulling in different directions. There can also be a lack of accountability within the organization.

You might like what you see, but what we don't see is the concern.

 

[toguy5252]

Some of us have corporate and large institutional experience (not suggesting you don't). We know personally how weak "CEOs" can muddy the decision-making process and how different factions can take advantage pulling in different directions. There can also be a lack of accountability within the organization.

You might like what you see, but what we don't see is the concern.

So you think that false bravado by someone who is seen by many and I suspect most other than his base is a sign of strength? Biden is old and he makes gaffes and sometimes has moments but his presidency to date has been very successful by any objective measure.

All you had to So was watch Joe in Vietnam and no honest person could say that he did not have a firm grasp of the issues and csme across as a leader. Compare that to your hero:

Mr president what do you think about [pick a topic]

The chosen one: you will see. We will respond very strongly. Very strongly. Just wait .

That is what passes for being presidential. He is Chauncey Gardner

 

[mitchell76]

So you think that false bravado by someone who is seen by many and I suspect most other than his base is a sign of strength? Biden is old and he makes gaffes and sometimes has moments but his presidency to date has been very successful by any objective measure.

All you had to So was watch Joe in Vietnam and no honest person could say that he did not have a firm grasp of the issues and csme across as a leader. Compare that to your hero:

Mr president what do you think about [pick a topic]

The chosen one: you will see. We will respond very strongly. Very strongly. Just wait .

That is what passes for being presidential. He is Chauncey Gardner

When Biden was recently in Vietnam, all Biden wanted to do, was "go to bed."....LMAO

 

[Frankfooter]

Some of us have corporate and large institutional experience (not suggesting you don't). We know personally how weak "CEOs" can muddy the decision-making process and how different factions can take advantage pulling in different directions. There can also be a lack of accountability within the organization.

You might like what you see, but what we don't see is the concern.

You wouldn't like what you see with any dem president.
The fact that the only real criticism about Biden is that he still stutters and is old means there isn't anything serious you can attack him with.

Yeah, he's old and if elected again likely won't live through a full term.
But if he has another 2-4 years of similar record I think most dems would be pretty happy.
He's got more done than a lot of others before him.

 

[WyattEarp]

So you think that false bravado by someone who is seen by many and I suspect most other than his base is a sign of strength? Biden is old and he makes gaffes and sometimes has moments but his presidency to date has been very successful by any objective measure.

All you had to So was watch Joe in Vietnam and no honest person could say that he did not have a firm grasp of the issues and csme across as a leader. Compare that to your hero:

Mr president what do you think about [pick a topic]

The chosen one: you will see. We will respond very strongly. Very strongly. Just wait .

That is what passes for being presidential. He is Chauncey Gardner

The problem is that Joe Biden is President and is held to that standard. Your argument at its essence (and I'm not overstating) seems to be Biden can run if Trump gets to run. Not exactly a glowing recommendation.

Some liberals here want to double-down on Biden in the face of his poor approval ratings. Other liberals here are keeping quiet on a Biden 2nd term. It would seem it would behoove everyone not to go all-in on a 2nd term with the strong possibility Biden withdraws his candidacy. In that event, I think some here will simply pitch whatever lame excuse his handlers spin for his withdrawal from the race.

I get tired of saying read my words on the page. When you respond to me, respond to my words not your projections.

 

[toguy5252]

The problem is that Joe Biden is President and is held to that standard. Your argument at its essence (and I'm not overstating) seems to be Biden can run if Trump gets to run. Not exactly a glowing recommendation.

Some liberals here want to double-down on Biden in the face of his poor approval ratings. Other liberals here are keeping quiet on a Biden 2nd term. It would seem it would behoove everyone not to go all-in on a 2nd term with the strong possibility Biden withdraws his candidacy. In that event, I think some here will simply pitch whatever lame excuse his handlers spin for his withdrawal from the race.

I get tired of saying read my words on the page. When you respond to me, respond to my words not your projections.

You are now speaking of the future when your post and.my reply dealt with the present. He is certainly old. That goes without saying UT to date he has had a very successful and impactful presidency. Is he too old to run again? Probably but he with that he is.much better than the current alternative.

 

[WyattEarp]

You are now speaking of the future when your post and.my reply dealt with the present. He is certainly old. That goes without saying UT to date he has had a very successful and impactful presidency. Is he too old to run again? Probably but he with that he is.much better than the current alternative.

You're speaking in tongues. The "current alternative" would and should include Gavin Newsom, Gretchen Whitmer, Joe Manchin and so on.

You're falling into this world where Trump weighs on your perspective. I don't want to mess with people's heads, but if the Dems are doing such a great job surely Newsom, Whitmer or another leading Democrat could beat Trump.

Proclamations aside, successful Presidencies are never judged in real time. Contrary to TERB progressive belief, passing legislation without bipartisan support is the easy part. You or your party have to be reelected and your legislation has to have a lasting impact beyond spending some bucks or cutting some taxes in the near-term.

 

[Valcazar]

You're speaking in tongues. The "current alternative" would and should include Gavin Newsom, Gretchen Whitmer, Joe Manchin and so on.

Except that no party is likely to give up its incumbency advantage if they don't have to.
More importantly, the party has virtually no way to make him step down.

Anyone running against him in a primary is likely to get crushed.
If they don't get crushed, they are likely to weaken whoever does come out of the primary.

(Memories of Reagan in 76 haunt both parties, and many even consider Kennedy's run in 80 as a mistake that weakened Carter, even if in both cases the evidence is less than fully compelling.)

You can argue it is a collective action problem, I suppose.
Since no candidate is strong enough that the party will obviously rally behind them instead of Biden, no candidate wants to step forward, even if they all stepped forward, they might be able to force Biden to realize he can't win. But doing that doesn't mean you get to be the next in line and may also poison the well for any future hopes you might have. So it won't happen unless Biden gets much, much weaker.

In a way it is similar to the Trump dilemma for the GOP.
No one can win without attacking Trump, but attacking Trump (especially doing it first) almost guarantees you lose power in the party now and don't become the next in line, even if you do manage to succeed in taking him out. So everyone wants someone else to do it or just figures they will wait until Trump takes himself out of contention.

 

[Frankfooter]

Except that no party is likely to give up its incumbency advantage if they don't have to.
More importantly, the party has virtually no way to make him step down.

Anyone running against him in a primary is likely to get crushed.
If they don't get crushed, they are likely to weaken whoever does come out of the primary.

(Memories of Reagan in 76 haunt both parties, and many even consider Kennedy's run in 80 as a mistake that weakened Carter, even if in both cases the evidence is less than fully compelling.)

You can argue it is a collective action problem, I suppose.
Since no candidate is strong enough that the party will obviously rally behind them instead of Biden, no candidate wants to step forward, even if they all stepped forward, they might be able to force Biden to realize he can't win. But doing that doesn't mean you get to be the next in line and may also poison the well for any future hopes you might have. So it won't happen unless Biden gets much, much weaker.

In a way it is similar to the Trump dilemma for the GOP.
No one can win without attacking Trump, but attacking Trump (especially doing it first) almost guarantees you lose power in the party now and don't become the next in line, even if you do manage to succeed in taking him out. So everyone wants someone else to do it or just figures they will wait until Trump takes himself out of contention.

So it will be a choice between an 80 year old and a 77 year old, with the 77 year old trying to claim that 80 is too old to govern.

 

[WyattEarp]

More importantly, the party has virtually no way to make him step down.

This is a bit of an overstatement. The party cleared the path for his nomination in 2020. They certainly could close that path now. I think the Democratic party still thinks they can squeeze another victory out of the old toothpaste tube.

Anyone running against him in a primary is likely to get crushed. If they don't get crushed, they are likely to weaken whoever does come out of the primary.

I actually don't think a strong Democratic leader would get crushed by Biden in the primaries.

Per Hans Noel, professor of Government at Georgetown University and co-author of The Party Decides: Presidential Nominations Before and After Reform regarding primary challenges weakening incumbents: “It’s probably not that the challenge itself weakened the nominee,, but the fact that they were weak drew their challenge in the first place. So just being challenged is not a good sign.”

I suspect at this early point Democratic party leaders believe a primary challenge would be an acknowledgement of Biden's weakness. They're trying to maintain appearances and hold his candidacy together. Clearly the people closest to him, Jill and his closest advisors have a lot of influence. They're not going to want to give up power and the trappings of the White House so readily.

 

[Valcazar]

This is a bit of an overstatement. The party cleared the path for his nomination in 2020. They certainly could close that path now. I think the Democratic party still thinks they can squeeze another victory out of the old toothpaste tube.

What path did they clear for his nomination in 2020?
There were 29 declared candidates and 11 of them made it to the formal beginning of the primary.

That's not a cleared field at all.

The party has very little ability to force someone out of the party or to force someone not to run.
Even less so if it doesn't involve a formal breach of some party rule concerning running.

I actually don't think a strong Democratic leader would get crushed by Biden in the primaries.

Per Hans Noel, professor of Government at Georgetown University and co-author of The Party Decides: Presidential Nominations Before and After Reform regarding primary challenges weakening incumbents: “It’s probably not that the challenge itself weakened the nominee,, but the fact that they were weak drew their challenge in the first place. So just being challenged is not a good sign.”

Which is exactly my point.
Unless you are already strong enough to be pretty sure you can win, you aren't strong enough to challenge.

No one considers themselves to be in that position or they would do it.

This dovetails with "the party could clear the field".
The party can rally behind someone else, if that person is strong enough, and maybe push Biden out by showing it is useless.
They can't push him out first because they want someone else.

I suspect at this early point Democratic party leaders believe a primary challenge would be an acknowledgement of Biden's weakness. They're trying to maintain appearances and hold his candidacy together. Clearly the people closest to him, Jill and his closest advisors have a lot of influence. They're not going to want to give up power and the trappings of the White House so readily.

Yes.
A primary challenge would show he is weak.
That would damage him and the party.
Therefore anyone wanting to mount such a challenge must be strong enough that it is obvious they could win and obvious that their winning would improve the party's chances over all rather than make it look weak and fractious.

No one is that strong/Biden is not yet that weak.

Therefore no challenge.

A challenge at this stage would get crushed and the party can't force the vacancy and then open up a primary.

 

[silentkisser]

Biden is the worst president in US history, and definitely has dementia. Whereas Trump is totally coherent, and with it. The problem the Dems have, is that if they get rid of Biden, then they have to nominate Kamala, who is even worse than Biden---LOL

That's why the Dems are indicting Trump left, right, and center, because they realize that Biden is a total loser!! That's why the Dems are hoping Covid gets worse again, so they can keep Biden locked away in his basement, like the Dems did in 2020. Also, if covid gets worse, then the Dems can institute, those fraudulent mail in ballots again!!

Are you a real person and not a troll???

I mean, you are typing sentences that appear coherent....but show a lack of thought or critical thinking. In what world is Biden worse than Trump? Oh, the right-wing fever swamp. But if you looked at their records in a non-partisan way, there is no argument about who has accomplished more for the American people that are not part of the 1%.

And, as for why they are indicting Trump....it couldn't be because he routinely broke serious laws, lied, obstructed investigations and stole documents? Nah, he's totally innocent....

In fact, I bet the Dems are hoping Trump runs again. He fucked the dog so badly in 2018, 2020 and even in 2022 that they want a four-pete of inept campaigning and the American people seeing what a cult of personality he is, and a massive threat to democracy...

 

[mitchell76]

Are you a real person and not a troll???

I mean, you are typing sentences that appear coherent....but show a lack of thought or critical thinking. In what world is Biden worse than Trump? Oh, the right-wing fever swamp. But if you looked at their records in a non-partisan way, there is no argument about who has accomplished more for the American people that are not part of the 1%.

And, as for why they are indicting Trump....it couldn't be because he routinely broke serious laws, lied, obstructed investigations and stole documents? Nah, he's totally innocent....

In fact, I bet the Dems are hoping Trump runs again. He fucked the dog so badly in 2018, 2020 and even in 2022 that they want a four-pete of inept campaigning and the American people seeing what a cult of personality he is, and a massive threat to democracy...

If Biden is so great, why is an impeachment inquiry, being filed, against Joe today??----LMAO

 

[silentkisser]

If Biden is so great, why is an impeachment inquiry, being filed, against Joe today??----LMAO

Because the far right-wing members demand it, despite no evidence. Kevin McCarthy needs to appease them to remain speaker, because if he denies it, the knives will come out. And finally, the major reason is to distract people's attention from Trump's massive legal issues while slander Biden despite there being no evidence. And, as many of us have been saying an impeachment was virtually guaranteed when the GOP re-took congress. MTG and Gaetz demand it, Boebert as well. As I said, Biden could cure cancer and they would slam him for hurting the profits of hospitals, doctors and pharma cos...


Also, I think it is hilarious that you think this is some gotcha response. Like, seriously, you think this actually means Biden is a bad President? Trump was impeached twice, both times with loads of evidence....but the GOP were too cowardly to convict.