Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.

Donate

On Biden’s amazing turnaround, and a prediction

Biden supporters
REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
Biden supporters shown at a Super Tuesday night rally in Los Angeles, California.

Former Minnesota Sen. Rudy Boschwitz used to have a pretty cute, pretty smart saying about politics. Quoting it from memory it went: “Politics is the only business where you have to make all your sales on one day.”

Former Vice President Joe Biden (who was in the Senate before, during and after Boschwitz’s tenure there) should borrow that wisecrack.

Having gone from prohibitive front-runner for the Democratic nomination to fourth-place finisher in Iowa to fifth place in New Hampshire, to when-will-he-drop-out territory, Biden made a lot of “sales” on Super Tuesday and is suddenly the front-runner again, based very heavily on voters who made up their minds at the last minute.

Biden didn’t suddenly become a silver-tongued devil last week. (In fact, he had to overcome a serious stutter to make it in politics.) Amazingly, he won Tuesday in many states he had never visited and in which he didn’t even run any TV ads.


The punditocracy is arguing at the moment (and I don’t disagree with this analysis, although I don’t claim to understand this amazing turnaround) that Biden benefited substantially from a panic among moderate and liberal-but-not-radical Democrats that if they didn’t unite behind Biden, Sen. Bernie Sanders might run away with the nomination. That fear was tied to the fear that the country is not ready to elect a president who calls himself a socialist, even a “democratic socialist,” as Sanders always does, although he has never called himself a Democrat, which is pretty unusual since he seeks that party’s presidential nomination.

The race for the nomination isn’t over, but it sure changed a lot in a single day. Or perhaps we should say it changed back, since Biden, after a political near-death experience, has only regained the front-runner status he had for most of 2019.

A remark, often erroneously attributed to Yogi Berra, holds that “predictions are hard, especially about the future.” The new future, of a likely Biden-Trump matchup, is an old future that went away and has now come back. We’ll see.

For a guy who doesn’t make predictions, I’ll make this one: The Burisma story will make a big comeback in Trump Twitter-land.

And by the way, Boschwitz also liked to say that he was the only member of the Senate not running for president, a wry observation based on the fact that he had been born in Germany and was therefore the only member of the Senate constitutionally ineligible to be president.

Comments (135)

  1. Submitted by Edward Blaise on 03/04/2020 - 02:13 pm.

    Too late for that prediction: After Biden’s Iowa through Nevada flops, Burisma investigations fell of the political radar with no significant activity.

    Immediately after South Carolina, public servant Ron Johnson, R WI. Immediately found serious concerns with Biden’s 50 year old son…

    “By ANDREW DESIDERIO, POLITICO

    03/02/2020 01:20 PM EST

    A key senator is threatening to issue a subpoena for records related to former Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter and his work for a Ukrainian energy firm — the most significant escalation yet in an investigation that has divided Senate Republicans.

    In a letter obtained by POLITICO, Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) told members of the panel that he will soon schedule a business meeting to vote on a subpoena for the documents, which are purportedly related to Hunter Biden’s role on the board of the Ukrainian firm, Burisma.”

  2. Submitted by Hiram Foster on 03/04/2020 - 02:24 pm.

    “For a guy who doesn’t make predictions, I’ll make this one: The Burisma story will make a big comeback in Trump Twitter-land.”

    I will be asking where Trump got his information and how much in our tax dollars he paid for it.

  3. Submitted by BK Anderson on 03/04/2020 - 03:03 pm.

    “only member of the senate not running for president”

    And in Boschwitz’s day not many senators did try to run–unlike the situation in the 21st Century, with half a dozen senators running. It used to be thought that a long-sitting senator simply had too much baggage from too many votes over the decades. Sen. Obama set the new pattern, and after the voluminous baggage trains of Bush Jr and Trump, all such reservations became rather quaint….

    The venerable Biden, of course, was one of the ones who did try for the WH and (until last night) had never come close to winning even one primary. But I guess all that’s forgotten now, as well as all the baggage that had made him an almost comic non-factor in his previous runs–errors and misdemeanors I can’t now recall but which will all assuredly resurface.

    Biden clogged up the “moderate” lane of the Dem cattle call, and choked off support and traction for younger candidates like Booker and Harris, as well as reinforcing the ridiculous idea that only an (old?) white male can defeat our Great Political Criminal. Now Joe’s in the driver’s seat, as a strange desperation apparently settled on the Dem electorate, merely because a couple going-nowhere candidates accepted reality 48 hours before Super Tuesday.

  4. Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/04/2020 - 03:08 pm.

    Does this mean that the business activities of Trump’s children during their father’s tenure are open to public scrutiny?

    • Submitted by Pat Berg since 2011 on 03/05/2020 - 09:23 am.

      It certainly should.

    • Submitted by Tim Smith on 03/05/2020 - 10:51 am.

      am pretty sure the every breath the Trump family breathes is being hyper scrutinized by the second.

      • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/05/2020 - 11:23 am.

        Is there any reason why that should not happen?

        Note that Trump supporters are the only ones who think lèse-majesté should be a crime (at least, as it might concern Our Beloved Leader).

        • Submitted by Tim Smith on 03/05/2020 - 05:53 pm.

          You asked if it should, I responded that they obviously have been, kids if both families are fair game.

          • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/06/2020 - 10:48 am.

            Except that I fully expect Trump and his disciples to scream bloody murder if anyone dares point a finger at his sons Doug and Dinsdale, not to mention Mr. Fix-it Kushner.

  5. Submitted by Mike Chrun on 03/04/2020 - 03:10 pm.

    It won’t be only Burisma. The spotlight is about to swing back on to Hunter’s love life and addictions.

    And the financial shenanigans of Trump and his offspring or the tawdry history that Trump himself has with women won’t matter a bit to the cultists of the great leader.

    • Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 03/05/2020 - 01:36 pm.

      I certainly hope that all you guys out there are able to control and contain your own sons’ love lives and substance addictions!

      We know that Republicans adore gutter-scum stories and hearings in Congress about them, but I have to ask: What in Heaven’s name does Hunter Biden”s troubled emotional and addictive life have to do with anything public? I don’t see it.

      I think Joe Biden would be fun to watch in Senate hearings that would give him kind of the free TV Fox News provides Donald Trump by covering every rally he holds, in full,f or the “benefit” of the American people.

      Those same folks need to hear in detail and with lots of repetition, exactly the non-connection between poor Hunter Biden and his VP father’s role as the Obama administration’s emissary to Ukraine, working hand in hand with European governemtns.

      As they say: Bring it on, Trumpites!

      Hunter capitalized on his Dad’s name. Duh.

      • Submitted by Tom Crain on 03/05/2020 - 03:22 pm.

        Maybe I’m naive, but I’m looking for a candidate that doesn’t enable friends and family to peddle influence. Someone who sees that although it is *technically* legal, it is morally dubious. Someone like Bernie Sanders.

        The knee-jerk both-siderism argument in support of Biden is disgusting and rings hollow. True, Trump’s nepotism is obvious and irrefutable, but Biden’s is nearly the same although better hidden so far. Biden’s image as a straight-shooting man of the people is clouded by the careers of his son and brother, who have lengthy track records of making, or seeking, deals that cash in on his name.

        The New Yorker published an article last July titled “Will Hunter Biden Jeopardize His Father’s Campaign?” that gives a good preview of what we’ll be discussing this fall.

        • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 04:08 pm.

          I would like a candidate free from corruption, which is one of the reasons that Sanders – whose family is far more corrupt than Biden’s – is right out. Sanders’s wife Jane was the president of a college which closed because of her mismanagement. She was eventually investigated for bank fraud, but still got a big buyout when the school fired her. This is part of the reason that Sanders (like Trump) won’t release his tax returns. He doesn’t want people to know where he got his millions.

          • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/06/2020 - 08:32 am.

            https://berniesanders.com/tax-returns/

            Here are the ten years of tax returns Brnie released before the primaries.

            You know, when one tells an outright fabrication that is so easily refuted it calls into question everything that is said? So you want to tell us again what an awfiul human being Bernie is?

  6. Submitted by Connor OKeefe on 03/04/2020 - 03:31 pm.

    In fact, the only tangible difference between Sanders’ and Biden’s positions is the Free healthcare Bernie is promising, and the fact that Biden hasn’t openly expressed admiration for Communist regimes.

    There’s a lot to dislike about Biden, but imo, it’s his promise to “Come after” gun manufacturers that will be the thing that brings him down.

    Lefties are incapable of realizing just how important the 2A is to Americans, or why. I doubt they’ll get it after Biden loses.

    I also doubt Trump will win the popular vote (thanks to California), but I’m confident he will turn in a markedly better total than 2016.

    • Submitted by kurt nelson on 03/05/2020 - 11:09 am.

      You’re referring to the suit by the parents of the children of the Sandy Hook slaughter, where 20 1st graders were blown apart by an assault rifle. That suit is going after the manufacture, and the case is slowly gaining traction.
      That is a bit different than the gubmint coming after your guns, but in paranoia land- those two things are the same right.

      • Submitted by Connor OKeefe on 03/05/2020 - 07:49 pm.

        No sir, I’m referring to what Joe Biden said to legitimate gun manufacturers:

        “I’m coming for you, and I’m taking you down.”

        The lawsuit isn’t going anywhere, because manufacturers are immune (by federal law) from being sued for customers misusing their products.

        Open that box, and car manufacturers are toast.

        • Submitted by kurt nelson on 03/06/2020 - 09:59 am.

          You obviously don’t know anything about the case, so here I’ll help. It’s true that gun manufactures are immune from lawsuits over their guns, but with luck, that will be about to change.
          The families of those little children blown apart by an assault rifle are suing over the marketing of those assault weapons, and so far, the lower courts have been sympathetic, it’s not a slam dunk, the slapdash law you refer to has the strong backing of the terrorist organization the NRA, but even their pull is not limitless.

          You realize that cars and guns are different don’t you (that’s a rhetorical question, your response says you don’t). They are. Now it’s true that a lot of folks are killed by cars, but cancer kills a bunch too so I’m not sure where in your specious argument you are trying to equate the two. “Yeah, but cars” is about as strong an argument as “yeah, but Obama”, you seem to like both statements.

          • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/06/2020 - 10:46 am.

            You would think that the parents who are suing would be proud to have their children become martyrs for the Glorious Second Amendment. Why are they so ungrateful?

  7. Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 03/04/2020 - 04:30 pm.

    Eric, hope you are jotting down all these predictions, we can revisit them in November! Not an overwhelming Biden fan, but Bloomberg nailed it, if you don’t beat Trump you have zero chance of anything, much less the “Democratic Socialist Revolution”! Personally, I don’t want a president (what we have today) that is all about himself, the hell with the country, has zero understanding of the environment and the climate, i.e. pollute, pollute, pollute, takes profitable enterprises (farmers) and turns them into welfare recipients, (and they are proud of it), So as they say in Master in Commander, its the lesser of 2 evils, and Biden is an easy choice over Trump, unless of course you are anxious for that dictatorship/quasi Monarchy. We all get to choose. Move forward or backward towards a totalitarian regime, we know that Trump would like nothing better than to be a Putin protege.

  8. Submitted by Joe Musich on 03/04/2020 - 07:07 pm.

    Although my heart went with the sadness of Biden fear vote and similar endorsement, my head only for a moment got stuck there. I cannot be said at the time of this posting that the accused “commie” is out of it. For myself Biden has too much baggage to even be interested a smidgin. It is interesting that those endorsing Biden would not for a heartbeat defend accusations made by those on the right against Bernie. That in a nutshell sums up my distaste for the dems. However predictability is a feast I too would rather not be lead into. But is “fun” to think about If Biden is “ensconced” how soon he will pick HRC as his running mate.

  9. Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/04/2020 - 10:48 pm.

    I’m not sure why the other Democrats would stand up for Sanders. He’s only a Democrat when its convenient – joining to run for president and then quitting afterwards. All he does is criticize other Democrats and the “Democratic establishment.” He’s never done much to raise money for or help elect other Democrats other than those in his ideological circle. The guy used to go on Fox News regularly to criticize President Obama. He’s been an ineffective legislator, with lots of big ideas, but unwilling to do the hard work of passing legislation.

    I thought this was a good article on Sanders.

    https://www.vox.com/2020/3/4/21164091/sanders-biden-super-tuesday-endorsements-primary-2020

    • Submitted by Henk Tobias on 03/05/2020 - 09:55 am.

      Nice job hitting all the establishment Dems critiques of Bernie. I’ll address your “concern” with him not being a Democrat and not playing nice with the Party, even going so far as to, oh my god, criticize Obama.

      We have a Democrat right here in this state named Collin Peterson, Collin voted with Trump 23% of the time this year, on big votes, like impeachment he sided with the President. Last year it was 67% of the time. Is he a Democrat, yes, does he support Democratic principles? Not so much

      Bernie voted with Trump 5% of the time this year and 12% last year. Is he a Democrat, technically no, does he support Democratic principles definitely.

      As for Obama there was a lot to Criticize, starting with his appointment of so many Republicans to his cabinet, including Goldman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson as Treasury Secretary to his undermining a public option by making back door deals with Insurers, Big pHarma and Hospitals BEFORE the Obamacare was even being worked on in the Congress.

      My Point, Bernie supports more of what the Party is supposed to stand for than some of the folks who actually call themselves Democrats.

      • Submitted by richard owens on 03/05/2020 - 10:27 am.

        FWIW, Hank Paulson was Dubya’s Sec Treas.

        “…Timothy Franz Geithner is a former American central banker who served as the 75th United States Secretary of the Treasury under President Barack Obama, from 2009 to 2013….”

      • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 12:43 pm.

        The problem is that the “establishment dems” is really just the dems. The elected Democrats. The people who do the work and understand the process for getting things passed.

      • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 12:51 pm.

        Also, while I realize that facts are not particularly important to Sanders supporters, Paulson’s was Bush’s treasury secretary, not Obama’s. The example you just gave to rebut my argument is bases on an outright falsehood.

      • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 02:42 pm.

        Sorry to keep adding comments, but I keep thinking of more to add.

        Peterson has a terrible voting record, but it reflects his district. The party is tolerant of that kind of ideological diversity. What Peterson does not do, and why Sanders – who does – is so toxic – is attack the party and its elected officials.

        A Sanders-supporting friend on Facebook posted a nice statement about Warren by Sanders. The comments were then immediately filled with the same vitriol and misogyny Warren supporters have been getting from Sanders supporters the whole campaign. These people don’t seem to get it – now is the time you want to praise your vanquished opponents to win their people over. But Sanders has creates a movement full of division and resentment that seems incapable of winning them. That is what the article I posted is getting at.

    • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/05/2020 - 10:02 am.

      https://www.sanders.senate.gov/legislation

      There is a reason Bernie didn’t pass much legislation. Fighting for working people all his life, both parties service to corporations, banks and billionaires pretty much shut him out.

      • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 12:40 pm.

        Sanders had done nothing for working people. Zero. Introducing ambitious legislation if you are too incompetent and lazy to do the work to pass it.

        • Submitted by Solly Johnson on 03/05/2020 - 01:59 pm.

          Sanders is not called the Amendment King in the Senate for no reason.

          • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 02:14 pm.

            To the extent that anyone really calls him that, Its a term of mockery. Part of the reason he is such a joke.
            Sanders adds a lot of little amendments, but does not move any serious legislation.

            Sanders has a long record of doing absolutely nothing for working people or anyone else.

            • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 03/05/2020 - 03:09 pm.

              That’s what happens when you’re a member of a political party of one.

            • Submitted by Roy Everson on 03/05/2020 - 04:09 pm.

              Won’t quibble about Sander’s day-job in Congress, but his contribution to workers has been enormous via his engagement in the national conversation. Call them democratic socialists, social democrats or laborites — they are a natural mainstream feature of any democratic system on the planet, except in the USA. Sanders on the radio and as a candidate has shown us an example, a first and only example, and while not the most persuasive or informative advocate for his cause he nevertheless has an authenticity and has led a movement and helped in 2016 and 2020 to move the party toward the interests of working people. (which will only bear fruit if he steps aside gracefully). The party’s tent needs all the B’s.

              • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 04:47 pm.

                Except he won’t step aside gracefully. Just like in 2016, he’ll keep fighting and attacking Democrats long after it is clear he has lost. He doesn’t care about workers – just about feeding his own massive ego.

                • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/06/2020 - 03:00 pm.

                  This is not a policy discussion about who is best suited to be president, this is character assassination of Bernie and those who stand by him. Who is not bringing Dems together, but dividing? I don’t see any Bernie fans here attacking Biden the way Bernie is attacked by moderate Dems. Not even the Republicans here have the level of vitriol for Bernie many moderate Dems seem to have.

              • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 03/06/2020 - 02:23 pm.

                Something about talking the talk vs. walking the walk.

    • Submitted by Solly Johnson on 03/05/2020 - 01:57 pm.

      The DNC gladly welcomed Bloomberg, who regularly has donated to Republican candidates, into the party at the last moment as a candidate. Since he has wealth and was willing to use it to stop the progressive movement, the party bent their rules and allowed him on the debate stage. Tulsi Gabbard won a delegate and qualified for the next debate, but the party again stated that the rules had changed and kept her off the stage, since she would criticize the establishment and their support of endless wars.
      Meanwhile, when Sanders had the delegate lead the DNC and all candidates other than Sanders said the rules and process at the convention must be followed. The hypocrisy of the DNC has no limits.

      • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 02:17 pm.

        The DNC favors candidates that support and lift-up the party, and does not favor dishonest, toxic, negative candidates like Sanders and Gabbard who don’t. If all you do is criticize the Democratic establishment, the democratic establishment won’t be too receptive to you. This really isn’t that difficult.

        • Submitted by Solly Johnson on 03/05/2020 - 02:52 pm.

          To only praise (support and uplift as you call it) the party and not accept criticism is the best way to kill any party or organization. Perhaps that is one of the reasons the Democratic Party lost over a thousand elected positions in the last decade and has seen membership in decline.

          • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 03:24 pm.

            I agree to some extent, but there is constructive criticism, and then there is the toxic, dishonest criticism from Sanders.

            • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/06/2020 - 08:38 am.

              Toxic, dishonest mockery of Sanders and his voters is rife throughout your commentary. You claim Sanders supporters are so awful, but I don’t see any Sanders supporters here writing with a vitriol equal to your language. That sort of projection is one of the reasons so many peopke do not and cannot support the Dem establishment.

              • Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 03/06/2020 - 11:31 am.

                Mr. Duncan, This is a moderated discussion forum, in case you didn’t realize it. That makes the rage-filled, hateful comments and attacks by the Bernie Bros and their toxic brethren on Twitter and other social media impossible to post here.

                Thank the Lord for strict moderation! If only Bernie Sanders would do something to control the ion-line viciousness of those “supporters” of his. He could make a real attempt to do that, but he has chosen not to. Enough said.

                • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/06/2020 - 01:55 pm.

                  Maybe most of that online uglyness is about .01% of Bernie fans (and maybe some Trump, etc Dem moderates meaning to make Bernie look bad), but somehow the media and many here act as though ALL Bernie fans are awful and nasty.

                  • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 03/06/2020 - 02:25 pm.

                    And MAYBE the moon is made of green cheese.

                    • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/06/2020 - 02:48 pm.

                      And maybe Dem moderates demonizing Bernie and all of his voters is a lot like the way Republicans tend to demonize the poor? Dems want the poor too vote Dem, but seem to otherwise want them to be silent, tow the line and genuflect before the Party? Let them eat cake, in one “untouchable” elite’s words?

                • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/07/2020 - 10:47 am.

                  The fact that the thread is moderated means that somehow becomes OK for centrists to belittle those on the left with petty missives and juvenile taunts? Because they’re apparently free from the worry of responses that might make them feel bad? That’s a rather odd path of logic, but I guess if one thinks that sort of behavior is productive, or useful for anything besides extracting some strange form of retribution that might help salve the knowledge that one’s own actions, despite one’s protestations to the contrary, are not so pure, not so successful, or not so wise as one might desire, have at it.

  10. Submitted by Ron Gotzman on 03/05/2020 - 08:56 am.

    It is only natural that additional scrutiny follows the front runner.

    However – this additional pressure that usually follows the added scrutiny should not effect Sleepy Joe. For political pressure to be added one must be first aware of “who you are”, “where you are at”, and “what you are doing.”

    With the protection of the “press” and the control of his political handlers, Joe should do just fine waltzing through the campaign.

    You would think someone in his family would pull him aside or the some real journalist would call for mental exams or cognitive tests like they did for Reagan.

    For many the most important thing is to get his guy elected and worry about his fitness of the job later.

    • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/05/2020 - 09:22 am.

      Once again, Mr. Gotzman, all of your attempted attacks on Vice President Biden could be made with equal, if not greater, support against President Trump.

      Should anyone who supports the “Very Stable Genius” really venture into areas like mental fitness to be President?

      • Submitted by Tom Crain on 03/05/2020 - 04:05 pm.

        Perhaps then we should elect a candidate who CAN make the case about Trump’s corruption and self dealing. Or one who CAN target Trump’s mental fitness w/o the attach being turned back on them. Surely that ain’t Joe Biden.

        • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/05/2020 - 04:31 pm.

          I’m not a Biden fan, but I think attacking the Goniff-in-Chief’s moral, psychological, and financial failings should be made by the Democrats. It won’t change the minds of any Trump supporters, but it will resonate with undecideds and independents.

        • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 04:48 pm.

          Well, it definitely isn’t Bernie Sanders. I think we can all agree on that.

        • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 03/05/2020 - 07:09 pm.

          Mud slinging (no matter how good the mud) is playing Trump’s game; it’s what he’s good at and what he wants.
          Biden’s strength will be ignoring the mud and presenting himself as decent, honorable and competent — what Trump is not.

          • Submitted by Tom Crain on 03/06/2020 - 09:32 am.

            Is making a case for Trump’s corruption and self dealing now considered off-limits, or ‘mudslinging’? Hopefully this country is still capable of having an honest debate about the facts.

            • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 03/06/2020 - 02:27 pm.

              The people who vote for Trump know what he has done, and don’t care.
              Something about the Lord choosing imperfect tools.
              As long as Trump pushes their hot buttons, they are fine with him being (in RB’s words) the goniff in chief.

          • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/06/2020 - 11:29 am.

            Mud slinging/poo throwing is going to be the chief tactic of Trump and his cultists no matter how high-minded the Democratic campaign is.

            The irony is, that while Trump will do it himself and the MAGA gang will cheer him on, neither he nor his fans will see the legitimacy of the turnabout.

    • Submitted by Pat Berg since 2011 on 03/05/2020 - 09:42 am.

      It is only natural that additional scrutiny follows the incumbent.

      However – this additional pressure that usually follows the added scrutiny should not affect IMPOTUS. For political pressure to be added one must be first aware of “who you are”, “where you are at”, and “what you are doing.”

      With the protection of Fox News and the control of his political handlers, tRump should do just fine waltzing through the campaign.

      You would think someone in his family would pull him aside or some real journalist would call for mental exams or cognitive tests like they did for Reagan.

      For many the most important thing is to get his guy re-elected and worry about his fitness of the job later.

  11. Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/05/2020 - 09:54 am.

    Biden is less an example of an amazing turnaround, as he is desperation by party elite and Dem moderates to maintain a long failed status quo. A return to the Obama years is not what circumstances in America and the world are calling for.

    My new theory is, moderates want above all to save the market. The stock market, that is, floating all those 401k assorted retirement plans, investments. Joe calms the market, the market knows Joe will take care of it. In Bernie they see the collapse of the market.

    In that sense, Trump is preferable to Bernie, hence the desperation, even if Biden is well past his prime and can’t stand toe to toe with Trump, at least Bernie can’t destroy the holy market.

    Except the holy market looks a lot like ecocide, so status quo is delusion, Trump or Biden.

    • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/05/2020 - 11:42 am.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4ytSI4PFm4

      Most moderate dems will reflexively retreat from this video…but most progressives, if they venture forth, would recognize, Tucker Carlson gets it more than most moderate Dems.

      The clips of Biden are hard to watch. He is clearly failing. Corporate media will likely keep this footage from us, but they can’t hide it from us or Trump in the debates.

      • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 03/05/2020 - 03:12 pm.

        But then, all you’ve got to do is listen to Trump in debates.
        He’ll make Biden look (and sound) like a very stable genius.
        Remember, Trump is the guy who said that the Constitution was like a foreign language to him.

        • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/05/2020 - 08:50 pm.

          You centrists really need to come to terms with the fact that you need to find additional lines of attack beyond “look at the big orange idiot”. Believe it or not, I’m gonna guess the vipers running the reelection campaign, who are not big orange idiots, PROBABLY have a plan to counter that particular strategy. Not to mention the fact that if you do somehow manage to figure out a path to victory, you’ll need to actually beat most likely a non big orange idiot in the NEXT election. I realize, long term strategy has never been your forte, but could you at least give it a try, once in your lives?

        • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/06/2020 - 08:58 am.

          When Biden says something to Trump like “150 million people have been killed since Bernie failed to sign the Brady bill,” unlike the courtesy he was given in the debate, Trump would deconstruct him in the most glaring of ways. When it happens repeatedly Trump will call it out.

          So we would have a debate betweena guy with the vocabulary of a grade school bully, and an elder in serious cognitive decline. Sounds about right for this sclerotic empire called America.

          • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 03/06/2020 - 02:30 pm.

            Biden is still smart enough to choose competent advisors and listen to them.
            Trump’
            Trump’s failing grace is ignoring good advice from the competent people still left to give it to him.

            • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/06/2020 - 03:29 pm.

              It’s like we’re in bizarro world, where the centrist plan call Trump stupid DIDN’T lose an election. You’re really gonna do this again, aren’t you?

  12. Submitted by Tim Smith on 03/05/2020 - 10:49 am.

    Establishment Democrats saw the writing on the wall, Sanders extreme left policies would be very harmful to the country, especially to those he pretends to want to help. Even if Sanders were to be elected, none of what he wants would be passed, no matter who controlled congress.

  13. Submitted by Misty Martin on 03/05/2020 - 11:14 am.

    I like Joe Biden. I hope and pray that he can win the election in November. I would SO like to see dignity restored to the White House. I can’t really think of anything that would make me happier (politically speaking) than to wake up the next morning, November 4th, 2020, and find out that Joe Biden is the newly elected P.O.T.U.S. I hope that Mike Bloomberg will use some of his immense fortune to fund Biden’s campaign to help make Biden’s election a possibility – that way, Bloomberg would still be a “winner” – he was quoted as saying that he wanted Trump defeated. Joe was my first choice, but when it seemed as if he was going to have to drop out, I was pondering my other choices for candidates I felt I could support. Super Tuesday made me very happy – if only that happiness can continue. Here’s hoping that the 3rd time is the charm for Joe Biden – he’s earned it, I believe.

    • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/05/2020 - 12:35 pm.

      With respect, Bloomberg might be angling now for Treasury Secretary. And as for Biden, I’m not sure what would be dignified about a man clearly in cognitive decline, in the oval office.

      • Submitted by Misty Martin on 03/05/2020 - 02:03 pm.

        Mr. Duncan:

        That is cruel. Compared to President Trump, the man is a genius, albeit not the “stable genius” that the present P.O.T.U.S. claims to be. He doesn’t rant and rave like Donald Trump does (windmills, anyone?) and he’s ever more refined. He’ll do fine.

        • Submitted by Tom Crain on 03/05/2020 - 04:49 pm.

          Thank god the objective measure of ‘cognitive decline’ does not include a comparison to the current president.

        • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 03/05/2020 - 07:10 pm.

          Among other tings, he’s smart enough to hire competent people.

        • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/05/2020 - 08:56 pm.

          Does anyone who makes this comparison ever think about what it is you’re implying? So you acknowledge the fact that Biden IS in mental decline, BUT since he’s not as bad (like, how close are we talking here) as the guy who is quite literally the biggest clown the world has ever known he’s A OK in your book! This, THIS! is your strategy for winning what might be the most important election in the country’s history. Bang up job guys.

          • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 03/06/2020 - 02:33 pm.

            For that matter, do any of you making that judgement have the qualifications to make a diagnosis about cognitive competence? I do, and I’d want a lot more good data (formal controlled testing) to do it.
            That’s what distinguishes diagnosis from name calling.

            • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/06/2020 - 03:36 pm.

              Sadly, I fear you’ll be seeing plenty of it, every time Biden is forced to speak in an uncontrolled setting. Unfortunately, by that point it will far too late to rectify your mistake. Personally, I think the biggest tell will be to see, now that the likelihood of his nomination is increased and he doesn’t need the push, just how frequently his handlers actually allow those situations to present themselves. It could get ugly fast if he starts avoiding debates, and I wonder if they’ll attempt to campaign completely without large rallies, using some “we’re different than those populists” rhetoric as cover.

    • Submitted by Cindy Oberg-Hauser on 03/06/2020 - 12:09 pm.

      Unfortunately, that is the problem in a nutshell: the unspoken lineage of establishment Democrats: it’s my turn, I earned by it being faithful to my party. Any ideas or campaign promises that challenge the party line are anathema. The party fails to acknowledge those whom they have left behind, which now are the young people who will never be as well off as their parents, as well as those who face the structural barriers that both parties have put up and work like hell to maintain. To both parties, change is bad because it threatens the power we’ve worked so long to attain by falling in line and not making waves.

  14. Submitted by Kurt Anderson on 03/05/2020 - 11:44 am.

    Deferring any comment on Biden, for the moment, I would like to ask us all to reconsider our acronyms. Referring to the Presidency with something that conjures up images or a plumbing fixture, or to the Supreme Court with a term vaguely similar to male anatomy, is like fingernails on a blackboard. I may agree that in the present time both institutions have deservedly fallen to low points of public respect, but we also need to think of the long term.

  15. Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/05/2020 - 01:48 pm.

    Trump will attack anyone who apposes him. The Democratic fantasy of finding a candidate that leaves toxic Republicans speechless has always warped their ability to select electable candidates. I haven’t found Biden’s responses to Trump attacks to be very impressive thus far, but we have to hope that unlike HRC, whatever Trump throws at Biden won’t stick like it was coated with crazy glue.

    I think its important to keep things in perspective. The media is covering Super Tuesday like was some kind of landslide. They keep pointing to maps and state counts as if these contests are winner take all events. The fact is that Biden only walked from Super Tuesday with 45 more delegates than Sanders, and his total lead is only 65. This is hardly insurmountable.

    I think Sanders biggest challenge is to overcome the ongoing media hostility and marginalization. The practice of ignoring or marginalizing all things Sanders while celebrating everything Biden will continue unless and until Sanders’s take the lead again. And even then, Sanders in the lead is met with panic and outrage rather than recognition and admiration. Had Sanders won Super Tuesday the media would be bemoaning the defeat of Biden and the collapse of common sense. Whatever.

    There’s still a long way to go, I think this race is still a toss-up. I think it all will come down to whether or not Biden can maintain the manufactured aura of “electability” and whether or not Sanders can convince voters of his own electability.

    • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 03:28 pm.

      Trump will attack anyone, but Bernie is so amoral and corrupt that it will be easy for Trump.

      • Submitted by richard owens on 03/05/2020 - 03:56 pm.

        You have made the same generalized accusation against Senator Sanders way too much for someone who wants to beat Trump.

        Are you campaigning for Joe Biden?

        Why tear down a man who has spent most of his life working for the vast MAJORITY of Americans against the powerful political forces enabled by buying and controlling our very government?

        Take it down a notch in case Bernie becomes our candidate. Joe is having trouble remembering and saying things that are cringe worthy.
        It is a long road and an unforgiving demanding populace.

        Please accept this as respectful criticism 100% aimed at beating Donald Trump/

        • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 04:59 pm.

          Bernie Sanders has done next to nothing to help working people. He’s good at spouting his pipe dreams, but has always always been too lazy, selfish and incompetent to do anything about them.

          Biden wasn’t anywhere near my first choice, but when the option is a vile fraud like Sanders, of course I am for Biden now.

          The things I am saying about Sanders pale to what Trump will throw at him. It will be deadbeat dad Bernie, because his kid grew up on welfare because Sanders didn’t work or pay child support. They will go nuts with the story Sanders published about how women fantasize about being gang-raped. The praising of dictators and communism. There is just a treasure trove to work with.

          • Submitted by richard owens on 03/06/2020 - 10:14 am.

            I sense this is about the time I should give up on you being a fair arbiter of Bernie’s value or his (now the Dem vanguard of ideas).

            Color me disappointed.

            Who needs enemies with friends like this?

    • Submitted by Henry Johnson on 03/05/2020 - 10:24 pm.

      That sounds a lot like something Donald Trump or his supporters would say doesn’t it? The media is out to get me, poor Don is not being treated fairly, etc., etc.

      But consider that 10 days ago when Sanders was riding high, and Biden looked to be nearly done for, I read headline after headline about how the nomination was practically in the bag for triumphant Bernie, and Biden was being talked about with what I would call ‘condescending pity’ by the media you claim is so biased for him.

      I didn’t read ANY articles in the media cheer-leading for him, or expressing a lot of support for him, or expressing much confidence or much hope or any desire for that matter, that he could come back and be a real contender.

      He was the ‘loser’ they were fully ready to write-off !

      I think you’re confusing the American bias, and especially the media’s bias, towards treating poorly anyone who looks like they are going to be a ‘loser’, with having some special bias against Bernie, since he didn’t do very well on Super-Tuesday (he was perceived as the ‘loser’ that night).

      Note also how they have been writing about Mike Bloomberg since he lost badly in Super-Tuesday, he’s portrayed as a pathetic fool who spend a huge amount of money and wasn’t able ultimately to compete – he’s a loser, so let’s kick some dirt on him while he’s hurting and down!

      They could have portrayed him as someone who spent a lot of his money ‘going for it’, but came up short, and given him some credit for trying, but no, he was just written about as a dumb-ass fool!

      Don Henley wrote a song long ago about these tendencies of the media called ‘Dirty laundry’ and it was spot-on.

      When you lose in America, or appear to be about to lose, the media doesn’t usually treat you all that well, that’s just the way it is, it has nothing to do with Bernie specifically IMO.

      I do agree with you that the media is making a bit too much of Biden’s success against Sanders on Super-Tuesday, and you’re right it’s NOT over, but at least Biden did grab a heck of a lot of delegates in a lot of states, whereas 10 days before the media you think is so biased against Bernie was practically laying a victor’s wreath on his head as the presumptive nominee, when only a tiny handful of delegates had actually been awarded yet !!

      I even read one headline back then that read something like “It’s time for moderates to come together behind Sanders”, implying they should just quit after a few small primaries and concede that Bernie was going to be the nominee, at a time when only a handful of delegates had been won!

      That doesn’t sound to me like a media that is fiendishly biased against Bernie!

      The media is fickle, over-states the news of the moment, and is not all that nice, especially when you are down, I’ll give you that, but they are that way to everyone!

      My biggest concern and wish at this point is that no matter who wins, that people DO go out and vote for the nominated democratic candidate.

      You said in a previous post you don’t agree with “vote blue, no matter who”, yet you have posted several times your belief about how the rise of right-wing extremism is the fault of moderates because they didn’t “oppose” the rise of it strongly enough.

      But the actual truth is, staying home and not voting for moderate democrats because you will only vote for leftist candidates is the ultimate in “failing to oppose” the rise of right wing extremism.

      And it’s probably one of the reasons that we have Trump as president, because I think quite a few Bernie supporters stayed home in 2016, in other words they didn’t “oppose”, Donald Trump, and that could have made the difference perhaps if they had voted.

      The truth is that I don’t agree with quite a few of Bernie’s positions, and I am very concerned that he will not do well enough in the swing states that will decide the election to win against DJT, but if he is the chosen candidate, you better believe I will be voting for him!

      There in fact is HUGE VALUE in voting for “the lesser of two evils”.

      Al Gore for example, contrary to the lies that Ralph Nader was pitching at the time, was nothing like George Bush, and if the democrats who stayed home or voted for sure-to-lose Nader, had voted for Gore, that would have spared us and the world the hugely tragic and hugely expensive ( in lives and dollars) Iraq war.

      Maybe Gore isn’t someone left-leaning democrats were crazy about, but surely he was far better than goof-ball neo-con George Bush, so the failure of left-leaning democrats to vote for Gore cost us a huge price as a country.

      They in fact “failed to oppose’ the rise of right-wing extremism by voting for Nader or by staying home.

      Let’s not make the same mistake yet again, by allowing disappointment over “our guy” not winning a nomination (whether Biden or Sanders is the eventual nominee) to cause us to concede the battle for political power to someone who is dramatically and far, far, far more opposed to our political beliefs than the eventual democratic nominee – whether that democratic nominee turns out to be Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden.

      • Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/06/2020 - 10:56 am.

        There has always been a palpable hostility towards Sanders within the Democratic Party leadership, and the establishment media. When Sanders’s is winning he’s an existential threat to the natural order, when he’s behind by a mere 64 delegates he’s being crushed by a Biden tsunami. No other candidate gets that kind of reception or coverage. Bloomberg, who is practically a certified Republicans was welcomed with open arms as possible savior.

        Any denial of this obvious hostility towards Sanders is facile.

        • Submitted by Henry Johnson on 03/06/2020 - 02:32 pm.

          And has there not been ‘palpable hostility’ expressed towards moderates by left-leaning media and leftists such as yourself?

          I think there has been quite a bit of that actually, look for example at your own past posts and I’m sure the articles written in left-leaning media as well and statements by left-leaning politicians.

          I think you want a double standard – you feel you should be free to bash and blame with as much ‘palpable hostility’ as you wish, but you moderates, well, you have no right to criticize my favorite candidate or suggest that maybe he and his ‘revolution’ might not go over so well in the fairly conservative swing states that will determine which party wins the presidency!

          Or to suggest that all this talk of ‘revolution’ and about how Castro wasn’t so bad (bye, bye Florida), etc, won’t also cost the democrats a chance to win the senate, and might even lose them the house.

          Pointing out reality-based, practical concerns like that is considered ‘palpable hostility’ I guess?

          You have a right to express your opinions, but so do moderates, and I don’t see why you seem to be acting like that’s somehow unfair.

          Well, as I just pointed out, that’s simply not true.

          When Biden was behind Sanders by far LESS than 64 delegates a short time ago, pretty much not just the left-leaning media, but all the ‘mainstream media’ had pretty much decided he was a goner, and was writing about him in those terms.

          And again, not cheer-leading for him to come back either.

          It irking you that the media is acting like it’s all over for Bernie now, because he’s ‘your guy’ apparently, but I assure you, 10 days ago, the same folks were acting like it was all over for Biden, which apparently you’re in denial about.

          If you don’t know that about the fickle nature of the media in general, maybe you’re the one who’s being a bit facile in his thinking.

          The media in general has tended to be fickle that way for a long time, and not just about politics – it cheers on whoever seems to be seems to be winning (at the moment), and tends to dismiss or talk down whoever appears to be losing, unfortunately, I think it’s probably always been that way.

          • Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/07/2020 - 09:01 am.

            My experience with toxic and divisive people is that they tend to think everyone else is just as toxic and divisive as they are. I think any honest observer can see who’s “attacking” whom on a regular basis here. I trust readers here can review this thread and others and detect the lopsided hostility towards Sanders.

            All I can say to people like Mr. Johnson is if you start a fight, you’ll get a fight. I’m not gong to apologize for responding to dishonest and ill informed comments, I do not recognize your immunity, and I am not impressed by your outrage. Any time people want to stop being toxic, and divisive, and dishonest, they are free to do so and I’m sure we’d all appreciate it.

            I’ll just repeat: anyone who claims that Biden or any other Candidate with the exception of Warren has or is treated with the same hostility and disinterest as Sanders is either not paying attention or is just being dishonest. That’s not an attack, it’s just a factual observation.

  16. Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 03/05/2020 - 02:08 pm.

    At least we have even more proof that the Common People can overrule Big Money with the power of all their votes!

    When we feel impotent to affect public policy, when we despair at mental incompetents like Donald Trump pretending to be President, when we see self-appointed and pretend-Democratic political saviors like Mike Bloomberg spend more than half a BILLION dollars to buy the Democratic primary, we can take courage and spirit from the fact that the PEOPLE outvoted the whole bunch. In the end it’s not dollars that count, it’s the votes.

    Just a note on Bernie: I wish Bernie Sanders had been intellectually able, over all these fifty-plus years, to get beyond his rigid 1960s ideological fervor for a rather simplistic version of Marxism. His political Marxism, which he has dressed up as “Democratic socialism” so he can try numerous times to take over the Democratic party he has steadfastly refused to join officially, has not changed one iota in all that time. He’s a mid-20th-century man, way behind the times for the third decade of the 21st century.

    He has no record in Congress as an effective implementer of policy. He really has no friends in Congress, in part because he doesn’t play well with others.

    Bernie is also an autocrat who puts forth a program that is in essence, It’s My Way or the Highway. (aka, “Only I can fix it!”). He brooks no nuance, no dissension from his views.

    And he fosters rage, hatred, misogyny, division.

    I’m tired of rage, hatred, misogyny, division under Trump. Every time Bernie points his finger at me and shouts, I cringe.

    Let’s elect Joe Biden.

    • Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/05/2020 - 02:19 pm.

      “Bernie is also an autocrat who puts forth a program that is in essence, It’s My Way or the Highway. (aka, “Only I can fix it!”). He brooks no nuance, no dissension from his views.”

      Now that we have two-man face off it’s to start responding to these canned attack on Sanders. Sander’s campaign slogan is: “We not me”, hardly an autocratic message, or practice. If you actually look at Sander’s campaign all he talks about is forming a diverse coalition, and he obviously understands the fact the whole point of diversity is assemble policy, not dictate it.

      Just because he actually HAS a detailed policy agenda that he and his supporters believe in doesn’t mean he’s dictatorial, it just means he’s committed to a vision that he won’t abandon. Don’t mistake passion and dedication for totalitarian impulse. This is why the idea that Sander’s is some kind of left wing copy of Trump is so ridiculous.

      • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 03:27 pm.

        The problem is that Sanders’s message isn’t true – it really is all about him. He’s a mirror image of Trump and might have a bigger ego.

        • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/05/2020 - 04:14 pm.

          Pat, please articulate Biden’s platform, without using the word Trump. What is plan for foreign trade? What are his plans to address climate change? What will he do should the Supreme Court throw out the ACA? Does he have a plan to address immigration? How will he get it through Congress if the Senate isn’t flipped? You’ve been very vocal in that you see no possibilty for Sanders ideas to be implemented, so I’ve tried to limit the list to things that should be easy for a supporter of someone you’ve decided should be the leader of the free world to answer.

          • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/05/2020 - 05:08 pm.

            You can look at his website if you want to see all of them, but on healthcare, he supports a public option – letting anyone buy into Medicare as an option to private insurance. Unlike Sanders’s Medicare for All, the public option is popular, supported by nearly all Democrats in congress, and won’t get shut down by the Courts. Biden was a skillful legislator who knows how to pass legislation and has the respect of elected democrats, none of which is true for Sanders.

            Biden wasn’t my candidate until earlier this week, and he definitey has flaws, but he is superior to Sanders in every way.

            • Submitted by William Hunter Duncan on 03/06/2020 - 10:07 am.

              OUR BEST DAYS
              STILL LIE AHEAD

              This was the slogan on the main page, in big block letters.

              As a former copy writer, I can assure you, I would have counseled strongly not to use the word “lie” in any slogan, in any context, except maybe satire about the other candidate. Otherwise, it does not exactly roll off the tongue quite like Make America Great Again.

              Otherwise, a casual stroll through his website, and I am astounded by the wordiness of it. The astonishing number of words! I’m certain Mr Biden doesn’t even have much of an idea, what is contained in all those words. That said, it sounds like Clinton’s and Obama’s people wrote it. Classic neoliberal thinking. More of the same that gave rise to Trump, basically.

            • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/06/2020 - 06:10 pm.

              I’m quite astonished, twice now I’ve attempted to post the simple criticism, that any candidate who is imparting the message “go to the website” instead of relaying their policy positions to the voting public every day in their own words, has already lost. Twice has it been deemed inappropriate. Sorry if it’s hard to hear, oh arbiter of decency, but it’s still truth, and it’s a disservice to those who might yet turn the tide and perhaps proffer said advice those who could effect a change in strategy before its too late.

      • Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 03/05/2020 - 04:06 pm.

        Nobody said that Bernie was a copy of Trump. But, let’s look at “autocratic.”

        I just said that he’s too rigidly Marxist and brooks no dissent. (and it’s me, not some shill, speaking from decades of experience working alongside a bunch of academic “salon Marxists” who never made it out of the 1960s, like Bernie, and they are autocrats, like Bernie.)

        I see this in Bernie, Paul. So do lots of other Democrats who resent a non-Democrat calling all Democrats–which he himself resists being, officially–“establishment” Democrats, as if that’s a dirty epithet.

        We’re Democrats. And of course, we are an establishment to Bernie if we don’t buy his line. We belong to a party, a party that wants to win in November by unifying us all.

        And that, by far, is where Bernie fails to impress me. He is definitely NOT a unifier of anyone.

      • Submitted by Tom Crain on 03/05/2020 - 04:39 pm.

        Actually Bernie’s campaign slogan is “Not me. Us”. Same sentiment as “we not me”. A positive message for a movement!

        Compare that to failed politics of a slogan like “I’m with Her” or “No Mularkey Express”. Actually, I’m not sure what Biden’s campaign slogan is now. His website shows “Joe Biden needs your help” which seems apropos

    • Submitted by Tim Smith on 03/05/2020 - 02:37 pm.

      Proof common people can out vote big money? Joe Biden bacame filthy rich through government work and has the money and support from dozens of zillionairs everywhere. He is not exactly a poor man advocate for the little guy. He got his son a cushy $600k a year gig eben though said son had no experience.

      • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 03/05/2020 - 03:15 pm.

        Jared? Ivanka?
        I’d bet that even Barron is on the payroll.
        But we’ll never see the tax forms that would prove it.

      • Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 03/05/2020 - 03:58 pm.

        So are you saying Trump doesn’t cash in big every time he goes to one of his resorts or golf clubs? Below suggests he averages ~ 2.5 conflicts of interest per day, everyday since he has been dictator and chief, I know its all fake because it didn’t come from FAUX news! Joe you really don’t give us folks any credit for our ability to decipher BS from reality, as an old international sales guy ~ 40 years worth, I got really good at it from a domestic and international perspective.
        https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Trumps+conflicts+of+interest+

      • Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 03/05/2020 - 04:10 pm.

        Tim, please look at Big Money: Mike Bloomberg. [Donald Trump can’t hold a financial candle to Bloomberg, liar and cheat about money that Trump is.]

        Joe Biden is neither personally wealthy nor did he have a huge donor class behind him. Hunter Biden’s personal wealth or poverty has nothing to do with Joe Biden’s finances. Get your facts straight.

        • Submitted by Tom Crain on 03/05/2020 - 04:46 pm.

          According to open secrets “Middle-Class Joe” has a net worth of $ 7.9M as of July 2019.

          • Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 03/06/2020 - 11:51 am.

            Tom,

            Joe Biden has held a well-paying, great-retirement-benefits (and health care benefits) job with the federal government for some fifty years. If he hadn’t been able to accumulate a $7- to $9-million net worth in all those decades, he’s have to be labeled a nitwit.

            Do you understand money well enough to realize the hilarious wealth gap between under $10 million in total net worth, and what Bloomberg’s Billions mean?

            You sound like a youngish, just-starting-to-save-for-retirement Pete Buttegieg when he naively, ignorantly tried to attack Elizabeth Warren who–with her husband, and both long-term, well-paid professionals–had accumulated net worth of a nice house and a pretty good retirement fund and investments.

            None of the Democratic candidates–present and past–is poor. But neither are they oligarchs who swim in billions. (Of course neither is Donald Trump! But that’s a different thread. . . . )

            • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 03/06/2020 - 07:28 pm.

              Actually, I suspect that if Trump’s taxes ever surface they’ll show that he’s in debt and living off of other people’s money.

        • Submitted by Tim Smith on 03/05/2020 - 05:42 pm.

          The Bidens are worth $9 million and have had 44 billionaires and their spouses contribute to his campaign. Their income for 17-18 was 16 million, those are straight facts and not bad for government work.

          • Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 03/05/2020 - 09:11 pm.

            Well Tim, of course you got some things wrong. All the $ aren’t from Government work, he has had speaking engagements and book revenue, and probably some other things, and your numbers are from where? They don’t look like facts. Besides, what is your point, its OK for Trump and his family to swindle the US tax payers, and give special favors to billionaires, but a democrat is not allowed to make money or know or talk to people with money?
            https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelatindera/2019/08/28/joe-bidens-net-worth-how-the-2020-presidential-candidate-built-a-9-million-fortune/#22106b0a104d

            • Submitted by Tim Smith on 03/06/2020 - 09:19 am.

              You don’t have to think real deep to put 2 and 2 together and realize all of his income is in some way a result from his very long career in government. He is a friend of and will help the rich.

              • Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 03/06/2020 - 09:39 am.

                Well your 2&2 doesn’t add up, what’s new?. Again you are suggesting Trump isn’t a friend of (some of the wealthy) he gave them near $1.5T in tax cuts, hell, he even stole from his own charity, Last check Bloomberg (wealthy) is quite the philanthropist! And he is endorsing Biden, Again you fail to address the question, are Democrats not allowed to know wealthy people or to become wealthy? Is that some right wing propaganda law? Hell, I did very well in 40 years of business, does that make me evil because I didn’t sell my moral and ethical values to the right wing devil? ,
                https://www.thenonprofittimes.com/news/trump-pays-2-million-fine-foundation-assets-liquidated-distributed/
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloomberg_Philanthropies
                ,

                • Submitted by Tim Smith on 03/06/2020 - 01:21 pm.

                  The thread started with a commenter claiming biden is not wealthy and has no wealthy connections or donors, I shared the facts that her statements were not true. Biden, anyone for that matter, has a right to be wealthy, I don’t care, just be honest about it.

                • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/06/2020 - 09:42 pm.

                  Again you fail to address the question, are Democrats not allowed to know wealthy people or to become wealthy?

                  Can’t wait to see Trump using that rhetoric to “fire up the base” where it will morph into “Dems don’t REALLY care about the poor, they just want to keep them that way so they can get rich themselves” as has been stated once already in this thread by our resident objectivist. To which the centrists will reply “That’s nonsensical, how could anyone fall for THAT whopper” completely incapable of understanding how their own blind spot to the very real problems of the poor (because they share with conservatives that very nasty empathetic deficiency that causes them to be unable to process OTHERS’ circumstances through any lens but their own) allows what they see to be simple common wisdom to be weaponized against them.

                  • Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 03/07/2020 - 02:50 pm.

                    Not sure where you folks are going or perhaps even coming from, appears because some folks have extra change in their pocket they gave up all their moral and ethical values as well as all knowledge to where they came from and how they got the extra change?

                    • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/07/2020 - 08:17 pm.

                      You do realize who you’re up against, and what HIS message is right? There is no way for a wealthy person, even one as apparently “ethical and moral” as you to tell a poor person to “suck it up and do it just like I did” WITHOUT coming across as a condescending “jerk” (I’d use stronger language of course). You might have the best of intentions, but it only comes across as “look at me, what’s wrong with you?”. The problem with using that line of rhetoric, or a nominating a candidate that espouses it, in THIS election, is that unlike your standard issue conservative, for whom that view is endemic, Trump uses his toxic populism to pit legions of other, not necessarily staunch conservatives, against the ranks of those folks just like you. To promote that view of yourselves, to say “what’s the big deal?”in the face of that rhetoric, is madness. You play right into his hands. One cannot fight passionate zealotry with reason, it never, never works.

                  • Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 03/08/2020 - 07:25 pm.

                    What you didn’t read is: A view that there is are party folks that appear to look at anyone with a couple bucks in their pocket as not pure and qualified to be left of center! Their ideas are not valid or left enough, To put it bluntly, it comes across as; shut up, pay your taxes, and we’ll tell you how we plan on spending those $.

                    • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/08/2020 - 09:34 pm.

                      Yeah, and despite how much that might personally offend some, the Democratic party will never win another election if those folks on the left are marginalized. If the folks so offended feel their lot will be better with the right, I fear they may find themselves disappointed, as their wealth is a mere drop in the bucket compared to the masters of THAT group.

  17. Submitted by Tim Smith on 03/05/2020 - 02:54 pm.

    I am so thankful Joe was released from that South African prison and lived to run again.

  18. Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/06/2020 - 08:46 am.

    Again, regarding these canned attacks on Sanders: The most impressive displays of dishonesty I see here are the persistent false claims and attacks on Sanders.

    Ms. Sullivan, you obviously don’t know any Marxist, I do… Sander’s is no Marxist, and the claim that he is is flat out dishonest. Sander’s is an FDR liberal, a Democratic Socialist. Anyone who looks that up will find that it is an antidote to autocracy, not a form of autocracy.

    These claims that Sanders is a dictator hiding behind the mask of a Socialist are simply dishonest. Most of the time when you see these accusations they emerge from HRC fetishists who are still trying to blame Sanders for her 2016 defeat. Whatever.

    As for Sanders alleged immorality, let’s discuss the immorality of contriving false claims and accusations against and about Sanders. Let’s discuss the immorality of dishonesty. Let’s discuss the immorality of leaving tens of millions of Americans suffering in crises indefinitely while we celebrate the triumph of “moderation”. Sanders has been fighting to deliver the greatest amount of relief to the largest number of people in the US for decades. You may or may not think that “realistic”, but you cannot classify it as immoral.

    Look, it’s simple- these ongoing false accusations and dishonest claims being made by establishment Democrats, “moderates”, and HRC dead-enders, are just noise. These people have either NEVER looked at Sanders or his campaign, or they’ve looked and are lying about what they’ve seen.

    Don’t take my word for it, go look for yourself. There a are a tons of videos of Sanders’s at his rallies and campaign events. His website, history, and behavior are all in the public domain and have been for decades. If you look, you’ll see a guy who brings labor unions, Latinos, American Indians, Muslims, women, and people of color onto the stage with a call for collective action and progressive policies. If you look at Sanders and see a secret autocrat who’s duped everyone from Danny Devito to Kieth Ellison into supporting him in a diabolical plot to capture the White House and rule with an iron fist… you may want to check your grasp of reality.

    I get it, when YOUR candidate has nothing to offer, no plans, no agenda, and no message beyond wanting to win… you have to attack the other candidates rather than run on your own assets. It’s too bad so many Sanders opponents are left with in this position, but the fact that they are tells us a lot about our political landscape.

    • Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 03/06/2020 - 12:12 pm.

      Mr. Udstrand, Surely you must know that any socialist is, by definition, a Marxist. Marxist historical analysis underlies every inch of socialist thought, just as it underlies the more-extreme ideological legacy on the left, communism.

      I’m not against socialism–lots of American stalwart institutions gleam with socialism–but I cannot let you pretend that there’s “No Marxism around Bernie, No, sirree!” You’re just afraid to use the word Marxism, because it doesn’t have a very good international record–pure styles of Marxism always lead to autocrats, a.k.a., dictators.

      Bernie Sanders spouts the same-old, same-old that my Marxist colleagues spouted, including knee-jerk praise of tangential stuff like literacy programs (tangential, I think, to firing squads Fidel Castro and other Marxists have used to eliminate dissent) in Cuba or welfare programs in Venezuela.

      I’m old enough to hear all those negative echoes of my “Marxista de salon” colleagues in Bernie Sanders’s rhetoric. And he shouts down all dissent, just as they always did. He’s a really old-fashioned Marxist, for our current century. Um, sorry. I mean “socialist.”

      • Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/06/2020 - 01:33 pm.

        “Mr. Udstrand, Surely you must know that any socialist is, by definition, a Marxist.”

        I’m sorry Ms. Sullivan but the very first sentence in your comment is absolutely and categorically mistaken. Socialist are NOT by definition Marxists.

        You have a moral and intellectual responsibility to be informed and educated regarding the concepts and terminology you use in any conversation. These concepts can be easily investigated and I suggest you do so. Your ignorance is irresponsible, and your claim is dishonest since you’re clearly unfamiliar with this subject matter.

      • Submitted by Paul Brandon on 03/06/2020 - 02:42 pm.

        Marxism is a particular subset of socialism; not the contrary.
        If you read the Gospels, Jesus could be said to be a socialist.

      • Submitted by RB Holbrook on 03/06/2020 - 03:27 pm.

        I don’t think you know what Marxism is. Marxism refers to a particular school of economic and political thought centered around historical materialism. Orthodox Marxism holds that the capitalist state will eventually wither away and die, largely due to its own inherent failings.

        Socialism doesn’t admit of any such convenient definition. I think it was the late Tony Judt who said that democratic socialism is a practice in search of a theory.

      • Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/07/2020 - 09:34 am.

        These attempts to brand Sanders’s as a Marxist of some kind are just some of the residual “hate on Bernie” garbage left over from 2016. One thing they show us is that when you shake some of these “moderates”; Republican talking points come tumbling out.

        The idea that you’re going to “unite” Democrats with Republican talking points has always struck me as a tad bizarre.

  19. Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/06/2020 - 09:22 am.

    As for: “My way or highway” politics, the most inflexible people in America are “moderate/centrists” who absolutely refuse to consider any ideas, policies, or agendas that challenge their own limited imaginations or comfort zones.

    The status quo and existing comfort zones are always the most inflexible positions in any society. Anyone can plainly see the ferocity and hostility that establishments unleash upon any challenges. The claim that progressive challenges to status quo’s are someone inflexible infiltration’s into open political and social regimes is simply facile.

    • Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 03/06/2020 - 12:33 pm.

      Well Paul you slammed guys like me, the problem is despite what you think, we are always looking, and yes we have looked at Sanders, and no we don’t 100% disagree with him, what folks like you are missing is that some of us folks would take a different tack to address some of these issues. That doesn’t make us Sanders haters or immovable moderates, perhaps a little more fiscally conservative than some, (including the average right winger). Example: College loans, with interest rates at ~ 1.5% all these college loan holders should be able to renegotiate their loans to ~ what the T-bill rate is. Total forgiveness? Why should folks that sacrificed to send their kids to school pay for some other folks that perhaps didn’t? Shouldn’t we have some responsibilities that go along with rights?

      • Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/06/2020 - 01:15 pm.

        Yes Dennis, and anyone who doesn’t agree with YOUR track is a radical leftist unwilling to compromise. Look, I’m perfectly happy to explain my position and let you explain yours. I’m perfectly willing to answer questions, and provide information. We can discuss the issues any time you want. I’m not the ones attacking people as existential threats to the natural order, except when I attack Fascists… Fascists are a threat to the natural order.

        People with clear objectives and detailed policy proposals that they believe in aren’t “radical” dictators, they’re just people with clear objectives and detailed policies they believe in. We don’t have to be enemies but if you’ll be my enemy I’ll be your enemy too. Let’s not be enemies.

        • Submitted by Dennis Wagner on 03/06/2020 - 03:37 pm.

          I don’t suspect we are enemies, different visions on how to approach an issue. Personally, I don’t think we go anywhere unless the right wingers are unseated, and then it will still be difficult.

          • Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/07/2020 - 09:17 am.

            ” Personally, I don’t think we go anywhere unless the right wingers are unseated, and then it will still be difficult.”

            I absolutely agree. I think history has shown that liberals and liberalism are the most effective antidotes to the right wing and the most likely to unseat them. I also think that history has shown us that once right wingers (I’m calling Trump and his allies Fascists) become THIS powerful, incremental push back fails. If we don’t want this contest to become violent we need a radical response before it’s too late.

            At the end of the day my issue with Biden is that he’s a place holder who will just sit in the White House being Joe Biden while Fascists regroup for a comeback. He’s actually on record as having said he won’t change anything in any dramatic way if gets elected. I don’t see how a place holder energizes or unites liberals and Democrats, although he may defeat Trump. I don’t see how Biden succeeds where Obama failed. When Fascists are in the room, failure is not an option.

            Note: I’m NOT attacking Biden or his supporters here, I’m just sharing my concerns.

            • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/07/2020 - 03:02 pm.

              I would say, that before all of that, I don’t know that what Biden represents (he himself is irrelevant, because it’s clear that he’s nothing more than a vessel for the ideology at this point, which is sad, because he DID actually have a measure of charisma at varying points in his career) will be enough to displace the Facists NOW. I expect I am a little more cynical than Mr. Udstrand with regards to the prospect of this all ending peacefully at any point in the future.

              • Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/08/2020 - 11:19 am.

                Once again, I have agree regarding Biden’s charisma. I photographed Biden a few years ago when he came to St. Paul to re-open or dedicate or whatever the Union Depot. The guy was a pleasure to watch and listen to. I remember coming home and telling my wife I could/can not understand how this didn’t get elected when he ran for president.

                The thing is, the guy I see on the campaign trail isn’t the same guy I saw in St. Paul. The “campaign” Biden stands there and yells at the audience claiming to have been the only guy who single handedly fixed everything and saved everyone, and promising to do it again. My advice would be to bring back the St. Paul Biden, he should just go around talking about stuff and explaining his proposals (after actually developing some proposals) almost incidentally. The guy is charming, and folksy, and comes across as trustworthy. THAT Biden would walk away with the election as long as nobody took too close a look at his agenda, or rather his current anti-agenda.

                • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/08/2020 - 02:02 pm.

                  Problem is, I’m not sure THAT Biden exists anymore. I have a grandfather who went through the long slow decline of dementia. The first thing to go was his sense of “presence”, it wasn’t that he couldn’t get through the day to day, or even that he couldn’t show signs of his old self quite frequently. It was that at certain times he was “off”, jokes told at the wrong time, momentary lapses in conversation, slight confusion about simple details. Within a couple years he was getting lost while driving, a couple years after that the person he was was utterly gone.

                  • Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/09/2020 - 10:11 am.

                    Yes, I think Biden and Sanders are both problematic this way. My wife and I were having dinner with another couple this weekend and we all found ourselves noting Biden and Sanders age and potential health problems. We found ourselves asking whether we can expect either of these guys to be in office for more than 4 years? So then you end up talking about the VP and the whole thing goes to crap.

                    My hope is that a younger (preferably woman of color) politician ends up emerging form Sanders’s “movement” to take over the leadership… and sooner rather than later would be nice.

  20. Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/06/2020 - 11:20 am.

    The problem with Biden’s public option is that neither he, nor any of the “moderate” candidates proposing it have described in any coherent detail.

    They keep babbling on about how people will be free to choose it, but what exactly is it they will be free to choose, and how much will it cost to choose it?

    Here are the inherent problems with the public option, and they haven’t changed since Democrats swept it off the table in 2009:

    What option? Are you going to create an entirely new insurance program or simply let buy into the existing Medicare/Medicaid regime? The problem with the existing Medicare programs are that they are currently means tested, you have to qualify for it financially. So are you simply going to eliminate all of the current qualifications, and if so, what are the premiums going to be?

    Their are also several coverage limitations with the current Medicare coverage that would need to be addressed if you’re going to offer it as an alternative to private plans.

    Who’s going to run the new public option? Is going to be a government program or a private sector publicly subsidized program?

    Public options make no sense unless they offer at least the same coverage for less expensive premiums. Private insurance couldn’t compete with a public option like that; so are you telling us you’re going to offer a public option that private plans won’t be able to compete with? If not, there’s no point in evening offering a public option.

    If you offer a public option that is run by the government, with comprehensive nationwide coverage and universal availability, for less expensive premiums, co-pays, and deductibles- the majority of Americans will abandon their private plans and buy the public option. If THAT happens you’re in the same boat as you would be with MFA, how do you pay for that? Is it subsidized or self financing?

    What exactly are your estimates of how many people will buy into your public option, and what are you’re cost and premium projections?

    None of the candidates have even acknowledged these questions let alone tried to answer them. It’s a fatally flawed proposition. If the public option is simply an additional policy with the comparable coverage and costs of existing private plans, no one will buy it. If the public option offers better coverage for less money, people will buy it in droves and put the private plans out of business. Neither of those outcome’s is described or preferred by public option proponents.

    For instance, Klobuchar wanted to limit the availability of her public option to 12 million people (out of 80 million who need coverage), how would she do that and why? Biden will have the problem.

    • Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/06/2020 - 04:13 pm.

      I expect it will much make the oft touted “high risk pools” for those with pre-existing conditions conservatives desire so much. It’s essentially just for show, either the conditions are made so onerous that no one will utilize it (“look, no demand, I guess the private system MUST be working”) or its underfunded such that it becomes unaffordable, and again unutilized. (“See, big government just can’t compete with free market efficiency”) It is, as most are when challenging vested, moneyed interest, a rigged game.

      • Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/07/2020 - 09:28 am.

        Yes, but if the “public option” is just a safety net of some kind, then it won’t be available to everyone, and Biden’s promise that anyone who wants to buy in will be able to do so… is either a lie, or a just a false claim emerging from the fact that he has no plan.

        And we would be remiss if we failed to note that American’s aren’t looking for health care safety nets, they’re looking for universal, nationwide, irrevocable coverage from conception to the grave. Moderates are just gambling that Americans will settle for far far less while they wait indefinitely for the health care and coverage they really want. Now that this is down to a two-man race, these differences will come into much sharper contrast. If or how that effects the contest remains to be seen.

  21. Submitted by Matt Haas on 03/06/2020 - 09:47 pm.

    Geez, its gonna be Deval Patrick isn’t it? Boy, I’m enthused, aren’t you enthused?

Leave a Reply