If you take all the allegations from both sides and treat them as they are: allegations that have yet to be proven in a court of law, and set them aside….
….you still have a creepy old dude who gropes people openly in public.
And it ain’t Trump. pic.twitter.com/9MMklTTs8K
— Mr.Kersey (@kersey_mr) May 15, 2020
[It’s two quotes but they are so closely related I put them in the same post for the best impact.—Joe]
On top of that, the other eleventeen candidates that were trying for the nomination get to be “Not as electable as the creepy groper with dementia” forevermore.
I don’t think it’s a pedophile thing. I think it’s a power thing. I think it’s a “I can do this to you in front of your parents/spouse/boss, on camera, and none of you will say a word except to defend me” thing.
I can hardly wait to see him doing his thing to Stacy (manatee) Abrams! Sniffing on her/it, feeling her up. And asking if she wants to come over and rub his leg hairs?
Or calling her a dog faced pony soldier.
Joe going to get his ass kicked right there on stage.
The comedy factor this guy provides is priceless. He says and does everything the communist don’t want you to know about them. And he’s provided the fastest political argument eliminator I’ve ever had. All one has to say is; So your going to vote for Biden? And you want me to take what you have to say serious? Really?
More than likely, no; I think he’s a placeholder. Someone else will be nominated at a brokered convention after something medical “comes to light ‘recently’,” as if it were not obvious to most thinking people for a while. Could be Hillary, Michelle O is a long shot. Maybe Gov Cuomo. Doubt it will be any of the previously running morons who are generally either obviously compromised by someone other than the party, obviously unelectable, or not totally controlled (like Sanders, who clearly believes most of his own BS). If it looks like the economy will be rolling again by the election, it’s going to be an expendable sacrificial lamb, like Gov “Half” Whitmer.
All you said. Or we could start a pool. How long between election and when they evoke the 25A on him.
Another possibility is that sometime between when the V.P. is selected and (potentially) taking office tragedy strikes and the V.P. candidate/elect takes over. I could see the correct timing and manner of the tragedy increasing the odds of winning the election.
If Biden’s family cares for him they will not allow Hillary to be selected as his running mate.
Talk about taking one for the team. Hillary as VP pick. Heh, that’s just asking to be put out of your misery.
Like you, I think replacement is coming.
It is fun watching dems do facepalms in the meantime though.
I was thinking about the 25th Amendment thing the other day. It’s a very real possibility, obviously. But the funny thing: suppose Biden decides he likes being president, and objects to being moved aside. If so, Congress gets to decide. And to have the president set aside, 2/3d have to vote in favor of doing so. In other words, most likely the Republicans would get to decide the outcome of that mud wrestling match.
Worse still, under the 25th Amendment, the president isn’t removed permanently, and the VP is only “acting president”. The president can clearly keep saying he is ready to return. The text of the amendment doesn’t say how frequently he can do so, nor how frequently the VP & Cabinet can vote to push him aside. You’d have the potential for a weekly circus.
Even without all these potential shenanigans, it’s pretty clear Biden is likely to serve only a partial term. So the VP is really much more so than usual the president-in-waiting. If the VP is someone like Pocahontas, that would be very bad news, since she believes her drug dreams every bit as much as Sanders does.
Even under the original language of the Constitution, the Vice President did not “become” the President. This was the argument between John Tyler and his party bosses after old (really old for those days) Tippecanoe shed this mortal coil.
Oh, and because the Associated Press style book has suddenly disapproved the word “Mistress” for someone who, as Willie Brown’s Mistress was, a kept woman for so many years, taking the money of a man for meretricious services, some are saying that means the way is clear for Kamala Harris to become VP candidate.
No word on whether Joe thinks she has nice-smelling hair.
So you’re saying he has all the qualifications for public office.
It’s better if he’s demented. It’s easier on a stupid, unprincipled person. He doesn’t have to feel the pain of understand what he’s doing, he’s less likely to have doubts and misgivings about the horrible things he’ll be facilitating, and so he’ll be more easily controlled. That’s a win win.
So what’s your problem?
An intelligent, aware politician has to be one of the few who’s totally on-board, even knowing exactly what horrors they’re bring about. That’s a bit harder to come by.
So, you’re saying it’s not possible that a person with the intent and ability to steer government toward adherence of constitutional limits could ever be nominated for a public office?
Strictly speaking, that’s not a requirement to run for office. Even for President, the only requirements are older than 35, a natural born citizen, and take the oath of office. That last one is only as good as the willingness to enforce it. Oh, and the ability to get the plurality of votes in the Electoral College, which is not the same as the skills required to govern and manage well.
So where’s the incentive? The Founding Fathers expected that the voters (their concept of the eligible voters) would be jealous of their own liberties and educated enough to know the limits of government power and want to enforce them, even against their own candidates. Unfortunately, the Founding Fathers have been proven to be exceptionally naive about the complacency of the electorate, particularly after impact of government-run education, which was NOT a thing in their time.
Not since Calvin Coolidge, and certainly not ever by the Democratic Party.
Also, being seen widely as a possible, clinically certifiable idiot, Biden is a great asset. He can thus avoid that one thing which all politicians fear most; full accountability. Coupled with the fact that he’s one of the last of the “good-o-boy” generation of “Segregation Tuh-Day, Segregation Fuh-Evuh!” he can most easily keep the inner city black people frustrated and angry. He’s loyal, entitled, no doubt indebted to the Party, vulnerable, easily distracted, and stupid, making him probably one of the best qualified politicians around.
And seriously; such a politician as you describe, with both the intent and the ability? That’s a tall order given the very limited abilities of any president or any single politician. Very near to an impossibility. So I see it as a moot question. BUT if such a super human were to emerge, and make it through the party nomination process (another extreme unlikelihood), and even elected to office, I don’t believe he’d survive long enough to do much. A solitary, whiny and ineffectual Congressman like Ron Paul on the other hand can be safely tolerated so long as he doesn’t build a significant movement. He can visit the flat earth conventions and make libertarians look like fools. No problem there.
I think you are overlooking a some critical points.
1) You originally said “all the qualifications for public office.”
2) I followed up with “could ever be nominated for a public office.”
This includes public offices other than POTUS.
Even if we limited the discussion to just POTUS it could be that a candidate chooses some segment(s) of government overstep for reduction. They realize that getting support for a complete return to the constitutionally permitted areas is not practical and probably not possible. So they chose just a few to work on while allowing status quo for other areas of government. For example they could choose one or more of eminent domain, gun owner rights, environmental issues, education, immigration, “entitlements”, etc.
I believe it is possible for such a candidate to exist, be elected, and “move the needle” in the correct direction on one or more of those issues while not allowing an increase in government overreach in other areas. Strictly read your comment indicates you do not believe this. And furthermore you general attitude, for years now, indicates you do not believe it is possible.
Can you correct my misunderstanding and/or demonstrate to me that such a scenario is not possible?
If not, then it would appear one path out of the mess we are in is to elect people to political office which are less than “Constitutionally Pure” (to coin a phrase) but “with the intent and ability to steer government toward adherence of constitutional limits” in one or more areas of government overreach.
Furthermore, one of the components of such a path would be to fill the courts with judges who are inclined to adhere to the constitution. They don’t need to be perfect. They just need to have the intent and ability to “move the needle”. One could make the case that for all his faults and considerable lack of purity our current POTUS is making progress in the proper direction. This is particularly true in regards to reduction of regulations and the courts.
It’s possible… but Trump wasn’t supposed to win.
karma will be a painful to them.