Are Joe Biden's presidential hopes dead?

[JackLuis]

Yes Dump, I understand that Polls , especially this far ahead of the election, mean little. I mean Hillary was supposed to wipe the mat with Trumpski, but....

However this lulled the people into a false sense of complacency and over looked the fact that lots of people wanted Change they did not get from Obama. Many people wanted more than he was able to give them.

However this election there will be no complacency, between the Left's revulsion of, not only Trumpski, but the rights horror of a Non-Trumpian winning, I suspect the turnout to be much more that the pitiful percentage of 2016.

It is fun to watch the field swirl about the polls though.

 

[DawnODay]

A. Goodman, Six times Biden described major events in his life that never happened, Washington Examiner (Aug. 19, 2019).

 

[DawnODay]

....

I think creepy Uncle Joe has passed his "use or freeze by" date.

More evidence:

Former Vice President Joe Biden incorrectly referred to Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy as having been “assassinated in the ’70s, late 70” during a Tuesday campaign event in Urbandale, Iowa.

“Just like in my generation when I got out of school, when Bobby Kennedy and Dr. King had been assassinated, in the ’70s, late 70 when I got engaged,” Biden said, “um, you know, up to that time remember – none of you women will know this but a couple men may remember – that was a time in the early, late ’60s, early ’60s and ’60s … ”​

S. Morefield, Joe Biden Remembers When MLK And RFK Were Assassinated … ‘In The 70s’, Daily Caller (Aug. 20, 2019).

Actually, it was in 1968.

 

[DawnODay]

Liar or idiot.

It is hard to tell which of these best describes former Vice President Joe Biden.​

S. Walker, The flubs and failings of Joe Biden: He either can't tell the truth or doesn't know what the truth is, Washington Times (Sep 5, 2019).

 

[Dumpington]

DawnODay writes: "It is hard to tell which of these best describes former Vice President Joe Biden."

A LOT of progressive Democrats really DON'T want Joe Biden to be their party's 2020 nominee, and get really uncomfortable when you point to those polls showing his maintaining a double-digit lead over his nearest rivals (currently it's Liz Warren!)

Creepy-Sleepy Joe has formally run for the Dem-nomination TWICE before, and both times he did POORLY - starting with a run in 1988 that ended after only a four-month campaign. He tried again in 2008, but quit after a 5th-place finish in the Iowa caucuses. It was during the '08 campaign that he called fellow-candidate Barack Obama "clean & articulate," which flattered & impressed the Illinois U.S. Senator so much that he picked Biden to be his running-mate that fall!

And it's "Gropin' Joe's" tenure as Obama's vice-president that's handed him the Democratic Party's "levers of power," just like Hillary had in 2016, allowing him to fend off his many challengers (thus far!) But those party leaders who are serious about defeating Trump are slowly coming to the realization that perhaps the former Vice President is NOT up to the challenge! It'll be interesting to see what happens next!

 

[Dumpington]

As former vice-president Joe Biden's poll numbers continue their steady collapse, the obvious question has to be: "WHICH DEMOCRATIC PARTY CANDIDATE BENEFITS THE MOST?"

According to Ed Rogers, writing for the Washington Post, the former vice president's support is made up of traditional establishment-Democrats, moderates, and African-Americans. It's difficult to imagine any of these groups suddenly flocking to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) - and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who has the hottest campaign right now, has moved so far to the left that she's probably already turned-off a lot of Biden supporters. Sanders and Warren are revolutionary candidates, while Biden is the choice of non-revolutionary Democratics! But is there a moderate whom Biden supporters might actually like?

The four most likely beneficiaries are: 1) South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg; 2) Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ); 3) Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN); and 4) Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA). Andrew Yang's campaign has caught fire with some younger, tech-savvy types, but these are not necessarily in Biden's fold.

It is probably no coincidence that Harris just recently announced yet another reboot of her campaign. She was, after all, the first to take a swing at Biden in the first debate, and so it would stand to reason she believes the spoils of a Biden collapse should be hers. But despite several false starts, she has consistently failed to catch fire.

Klobuchar has been consistent in playing the Midwestern, middle-of-the-road card since day one of her campaign. She is smart with a head for policy and a record of reaching across the aisle. But her campaign has been sleepy from the start, and it is hard to imagine her campaign suddenly catching new energy.

Booker ranked in the top tier of performers in the last debate, and he is likable. But despite his best quarterly fundraising haul to date in the third quarter, his campaign seems stalled. Maybe he could find some energy in the vacuum created by a Biden collapse.

Mayor Pete raised more than $19 million in the third quarter - $6 million shy of what he reached in the previous quarter, but that's nothing to shake a stick at. Buttigieg is one of the most effective fundraisers in the race. Still, everyone says "I really like him, but..." and then proceeds to something along the lines of "this just isn't his year" or "he would make a great secretary of..." - which is what they said about Biden for much of his career.

Who knows? Maybe Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO) will get a second look. He was cut from the last debate, so he'd have to make the next one to show everyone that he's still in the race. To be honest, doing some research was necessary to determine whether or not he was still even an active candidate. And oh by the way, he is further to the left than he looks. The same goes for Montana Gov. Steve Bullock.

In short, there's no obvious beneficiary of a Biden collapse, which shows just how much the political gods are looking out for Trump. After all, the whole basis of Biden's appeal was that he would be a stable, electable alternative to the daily drama of Trump - exactly what moderates are looking for. But as I have noted before, with Democrats pushing for impeachment, what's bad for Trump might be even worse for Joe Biden. While impeachment might be emotionally satisfying for Democrats, it might also cost them their most electable candidate.

 

[magicalmoments]

In my opinion Biden is toast. Rightly or wrongly the shit being thrown around by trump will stick and cause just enough damage to see his candidacy fail. The other factors are age, potential dementia and general health. He should fall on his sword for the greater good.
With a second whistleblower coming forward this will embolden others who will also come forward, it will also embolden republicans who have been wavering, once two or three republican congressmen or senators declare against trump it will start an avalanche of defections. Trump will find himself abandoned, then watch him unwind. It will be a joy to watch.

 

[Dumpington]

magicalmoments writes: "In my opinion Biden is toast. Rightly or wrongly the shit being thrown around by trump will stick and cause just enough damage to see his candidacy fail."

Trump's Ukraine phone call has forced to media to report on Joe Biden's shady dealings in that country, which is something that the media DIDN'T want to do, as Biden's corrupt behavior reflects negatively on the entire Obama administration!

"The other factors are age, potential dementia and general health. He should fall on his sword for the greater good."

Biden & Bernie are BOTH too old and showing signs of dementia, but they're two of the TOP THREE candidates that the Democratic Party has to offer!

"With a second whistleblower coming forward this will embolden others who will also come forward..."

Nonsense. We've already seen the transcripts of Trump's phone call, and there's NOTHING there! Another whistleblower adds nothing new, and the Democrats know it!

"...it will also embolden republicans who have been wavering, once two or three republican congressmen or senators declare against trump it will start an avalanche of defections. Trump will find himself abandoned, then watch him unwind. It will be a joy to watch."

You sounds just like all of those Democrats on the eve of the 2016 presidential election! "Trump will lose to Hillary, and it will be a joy to watch!" The Democrats will get NO Republican help removing Trump from office, and the president will win a HUGE VICTORY in the U.S. Senate, helping to catapult him to a second-term victory over whatever presidential candidate emerges from the wreckage that is the Democratic Party!

 

[JKendallDane]

age, potential dementia and general health. He should fall on his sword for the greater good.[/I]"[/COLOR]

Biden & Bernie are BOTH too old and showing signs of dementia, but they're two of the TOP THREE candidates that the Democratic Party has to offer!

Reality-check time!!!!

Go stand by that life-sized poster of 45* you have hanging in whatever room of that glass house you live in, Dump... and then use this.....

.....then come back and tell the entire class what you learned. You ARE capable of learning, aren't you?

.

 

[magicalmoments]

Time will tell.

 

[Dumpington]

JKendallDane writes: "You ARE capable of learning, aren't you?"

magicalmoments writes: "Time will tell."

Even none of the liberal Democrats here on this Literotica forum have ever defended Joe Biden. While they may have tolerated him as Obama's vice-president, it seems that NONE of them were ever excited about his running for president. And now we know why!

Liz Warren is the most likely candidate to replace "Gropin' Joe" at this time, as none of the others (except Bernie) are even close! And Liz is a terrible candidate for the Democrats to put forth in a national election. They might as well just bring back Mrs. Clinton!

And yes, Hillary VERY MUCH wants to be called back! She still believes that she won in 2016!

 

[Dumpington]

“Say it nicer.” No words better sum up the news coverage of Hunter Biden. That instruction given from him to ABC News reporter Amy Robach came after she noted that he was “in and out of rehab” several times for dependency on drugs ranging from cocaine to crack. In fact, the media has been “saying it nicer” for weeks, telling readers and viewers there is “no finding of wrongdoing” by the son of Joe Biden while avoiding any substantive discussion of his controversial business dealings.

During the interview, Hunter Biden moved between muted apologies and indignant denials about alleged efforts to cash in on his father being vice president. The interview was galling for those critical of this common form of corruption. Hunter Biden’s deals are textbook examples of how political families become rich from public service. Still, many in the media continue to repeat Joe Biden’s position that “no one has asserted my son did a single thing wrong.” That, of course, is untrue. Even if the deals did not amount to crimes, they were wrong. They have always been wrong, but both parties have always protected these deals as a dirty little secret.

Democratic Senator Tom Carper of Delaware explained that Hunter Biden was qualified to get on the board of Amtrak because “Hunter Biden has spent a lot of time on Amtrak trains.” He was then given a position with the law firm of Boies Schiller Flexner while establishing an investment firm. Frankly, his entire resume is filled with high paying positions but few known accomplishments to justify them.

In response to all this, Joe Biden has declared, “I can tell you now, if I am your next president, I am going to build on the squeaky clean transparent environment that we had in the Obama Biden White House.” That is a rather odd statement since his own son’s controversial deals in Ukraine and China occurred during that administration, as did controversial payments to the Clintons and their foundation from foreign interests. That is not exactly the model many of us have in mind. In the end, it is hard to say much of this in a “nicer” way, but the questions must be asked.

 

[magicalmoments]

I've said it all along, Biden is done for. He's too old, like trump. he's showing signs of senility, like trump. He's tainted with corruption which may or may not be true, like trump.

Although he's not affected by narcissism, like trump. And is not a pathological liar, like trump. And is a basically nice guy, unlike trump, he's history and should pull out of the race.

Personally I would prefer to see mayor Pete as the democratic candidate. He's the only one that impresses me.

 

[JackLuis]

I've said it all along, Biden is done for.

Personally I would prefer to see mayor Pete as the democratic candidate. He's the only one that impresses me.

Pete is certainly the least strident "Progressive" I think he is trying to get along, yet times call for more aggressive action to counter the Rethuglicunt threat.

I'm backing Liz, so far. Kamala is too much a cop to waste outside of AG with the mandate to look back and fry the Dastards!

 

[Dumpington]

magicalmoments writes: "Personally I would prefer to see mayor Pete as the democratic candidate. He's the only one that impresses me."

JackLuis adds: "Pete is certainly the least strident "Progressive" I think he is trying to get along, yet times call for more aggressive action to counter the Rethuglicunt threat."

Mayor Pete represents a new breed of Democrat - one that seemingly no longer requires black-voter-support to win elections for that party. While he is certainly popular with mainstream white liberals, Buttigieg has virtually NO black support within a party that traditionally requires a heavy black voter turnout in order to win in November.

"I'm backing Liz, so far. Kamala is too much a cop to waste outside of AG with the mandate to look back and fry the Dastards!"

With Joe Biden's slow-&-steady collapse in the polls, Senator Warren certainly appears poised to win her party's 2020 nomination, Jack! But don't rule out a last-minute entry of Hillary Clinton into the race! I'm perfectly serious! Mrs. Clinton WANTS to run again, and all of the current uncertainty pervading her party is clearly tempting her to make her dramatic last-minute return! If that happens, she could win enough delegates to make it happen!

 

[DawnONight]

Poll: 57% of Americans want probe into Biden and son, Hunter, who was kicked out of Navy for cocaine, Law Enforcement Today (Oct. 6, 2019).

 

[magicalmoments]

#197 above
That's a good idea. I would support that. The investigations into them have already exonerated them but hey, let the incompetent, corrupt and dishonest federal investigation and intelligence agencies undertake a full inquiry.
My prediction of the outcome: no evidence to support any action. The Biden's are as smart as the clintons, they'll outsmart the law enforcement agencies.
Unlike trump who couldn't outsmart his way out of a wet paper bag.

 

[Dumpington]

The weird thing about Joe Biden is that, while NOBODY particularly wants him to be the Democratic Party's 2020 presidential nominee, he CONTINUES to lead in all of that party's polling, despite all of the mounting NEGATIVES stacking up against him: his age, his penchant for gaffes, and his ofteb complex relationship with the truth!

The former vice president has been written-off so many times, yet he is STILL the overall front-runner in most state & national polls! It's his maintaining that overall lead that's lured NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg back into the race. Biden's supporters argue that their's is the ONLY candidate pushing legislation that could realistically pass Congress - and that he's the ONLY Democrat with even the slightest experience in foreign policy. His critics argue that his stumbling debate performances would probably disqualifying any other candidate; and that his glitches/gaffes have become so frequent that he’s now graded on a curve, with outside observers (and even his own aides) greeting his bad days with “Could have been worse!”

Biden, of couse, benefits from having been Barack Obama's vice president. This especially helps him with Democratic Party BLACK voters, who feel increasingly uncomfortable with the neo-socialist progressives taking over their party. Biden's people ALSO note that, starting with the inappropriate-touching “scandal” from last spring, none of the things that were supposed to destroy their candidate have had any lasting impact. Yes, they know that other campaigns believe the Biden campaign has taken on so much water that it’s only a matter of time before it capsizes. Yes, they hear the smart political commentators saying the polls are lagging indicators that don’t reflect the current reality of a sinking campaign. But the Biden skeptics have been saying that for months and he’s still trundling along as a front-runner!

And what of the observation, registered both by other campaigns and by reporters, that Biden’s crowds are smaller and less exuberant than, say, Warren’s or Buttigieg’s? Joe's team insists that he's choosing smalerl venues on purpose, because that’s how you reach voters; they say that polling in Iowa shows his strength is in rural areas, and that they expect to run up the score there.

The two previous times Biden ran for president, he flamed out ignominiously - first, in a plagiarism scandal (1988) and then a 1 percent showing in Iowa (2008). Three is supposed to be the charm, but it doesn't appear that ANYBODY in today's Democratic Party is very excited about it!

 

[JackLuis]

Democratic Establishment Wondering Just How Stuck They Are With Joe Biden

People -- well, mostly white dudes -- like to claim that Hillary Clinton was a sucktastic candidate. However, there's a reason her only serious competition in 2016 was the socialist. It wasn't because the DNC "cleared the field" for Queen Hillary's coronation. People just didn't want to get their asses beat.

It's quite a different primary race this time. So many Democrats are running it's hard to notice when they drop out. It's like raking leaves. They still keep piling up. Joe Biden is the mostly undisputed frontrunner, and that excites no one, not even his wife. He was the non-threatening choice, perfectly capable of defeating Donald Trump with his high-octane electability. But according to a recent article in the New York Times, the "movers and shakers" in the party are having second thoughts. Maybe they finally Googled "Joe Biden." Regardless, according to the Times, they're asking themselves, "Is there anybody else?

Biden won't get much until the Carolinas, but can he hang in 'til then?

 

[Ziggins]

Dump, do you work in talk radio? Why do you use italics so much?

 

[Dumpington]

JackLuis writes: "Biden won't get much until the Carolinas, but can he hang in 'til then?"

I agree with you, Jack. Biden won't win Iowa or New Hampshire - but those early battles will only eliminate those dozen or so candidates unable to garner even one-percent support. Biden, Liz Warren, & Bernie will all survive, no matter what. BLACK Democrats are what saved Hillary Clinton, and they'll do the same thing for Creepy-Sleepy Joe, as he sweeps the southern primaries to remain atop the delegate count.

But winning black Democrat primary voters and winning the black vote in November of 2020 are two entirely different things! Black voter support for Biden will be every bit as SHALLOW for him as it was for Mrs. Clinton, and perhaps even WORSE, as black unemployment levels remain at record-lows under Trump!

Ziggins asks: "Dump, do you work in talk radio? Why do you use italics so much?"

I guess I just like using italics to emphasize certain points that I'm trying to make, Ziggins. Different strokes for different folks... and so on and so on...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUUhDoCx8zc - ("Everyday People" by Sly & The Family Stone - runs 2:23)

 

[Tabithablack]

Biden is leading for two reasons and neither are really about him

1-The obvious Obama nostalgia and a lot of people thinking how would it have turned out if he ran in 2016 instead of Hillary

2-sanity. Biden is the only legit contender not trying to go further left than the other candidates. He's at this point a moderate in a field of faus far leftists who in reality are similar to Biden's politics, but are pretending to be all about climate/race/trans/open borders, whatever the far left is outraged about at any give moment

If Warren ran as what she really is, and that is not a true progressive, I think she'd win hands down. But she wants to play the appease the minority and spurn the majority game that worked so well for Clinton in 2016.

Biden is the run of the mill nothing spectacular solid old school Dem and a lot of people whether they say it or not are far less afraid of him than they are of the other lunatics.

 

[Dumpington]

I found this is The American Spectator by E. Donald Elliott:

What About a Biden Impeachment Inquiry?

Joe did what Trump is accused of doing!

Joe Biden has admitted to doing almost exactly what the House Democrats accuse President Trump of doing in their impeachment inquiry: using his position in government to obtain private political benefit from a foreign government. We should all be asking, “Why isn’t Biden also the target of a second impeachment inquiry?”

Impeaching a former Vice President is not a meaningless gesture because impeachment may prohibit someone from holding office in the future, including the presidency in Biden’s case - in the words of the Constitution, impeachment may disqualify a person “to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.”

As vice president, Joe Biden threatened to hold up a billion dollars in aid to Ukraine unless that country fired a prosecutor who was investigating Burisma, the energy company that was paying his son $600,000 a year to serve on its board of directors. There is no dispute here. You can even watch Biden on YouTube bragging to the Council on Foreign Relations that he did it: “I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor [Shokin] is not fired, you’re not getting the money [a $1 billion loan guarantee].’ Well, son of a b-tch.… He got fired.”

As a result, the investigation of Burisma was suspended, at least until Trump tried to get it restarted, a move for which the Dems want to impeach him.

Despite the eerie similarity of Biden’s actions to those that are supposed to constitute “high crimes and misdemeanors” warranting the impeachment of President Trump, Biden and his supporters dare anyone to find anything illegal in his use of his official position to threaten to withhold aid to Ukraine unless it stifled a criminal investigation of his son’s company.

I think I have solved that riddle. An Office of Government Ethics regulation prohibits all government employees from using their offices “for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity.” That would seem to be directly on point, but alas, the definition of government “employees” to which the regulation applies specifically excludes the president and vice president. That exclusion is apparently because the president and vice president are subject to impeachment, which is likely the exclusive constitutional remedy for their misdeeds while in office.

Admittedly, there are distinctions between what Biden did and what Trump did. Trump was trying to restart an investigation by a foreign government into plausible violations of its laws, but what Trump asked for never actually happened. Biden, on the other hand, successfully killed an investigation into possible violations of Ukrainian and U.S. laws against bribery by Burisma. Biden appears to have misused his government position to obstruct the criminal justice system of another country so that an ongoing investigation would not embarrass him politically, whereas Trump is accused of trying to induce a foreign country to interfere in our elections by making information about those misdeeds by his rival public.

What Trump did was to ask a foreign government to investigate a potentially impeachable offense by a political rival. That’s the real issue underlying the current impeachment debate. The Democrats and their media allies want to cover that up by calling it “dirt” or a “smear,” but the correct term for what Biden did, and what Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate, is a potentially impeachable offense by Biden that may also have been a violation of foreign and U.S. bribery laws by Burisma.

Fairness demands that we apply the same standards to both Biden and Trump.

What’s sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander.

 

[Ramone45]

I don't think he will become president. He's a feeble old white man. It's a shame that this great country has such shitty leaders/representatives.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

I found this is The American Spectator by E. Donald Elliott:

What About a Biden Impeachment Inquiry?

Joe did what Trump is accused of doing!

Joe Biden has admitted to doing almost exactly what the House Democrats accuse President Trump of doing in their impeachment inquiry: using his position in government to obtain private political benefit from a foreign government. We should all be asking, “Why isn’t Biden also the target of a second impeachment inquiry?”

Impeaching a former Vice President is not a meaningless gesture because impeachment may prohibit someone from holding office in the future, including the presidency in Biden’s case - in the words of the Constitution, impeachment may disqualify a person “to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.”

As vice president, Joe Biden threatened to hold up a billion dollars in aid to Ukraine unless that country fired a prosecutor who was investigating Burisma, the energy company that was paying his son $600,000 a year to serve on its board of directors. There is no dispute here. You can even watch Biden on YouTube bragging to the Council on Foreign Relations that he did it: “I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor [Shokin] is not fired, you’re not getting the money [a $1 billion loan guarantee].’ Well, son of a b-tch.… He got fired.”

As a result, the investigation of Burisma was suspended, at least until Trump tried to get it restarted, a move for which the Dems want to impeach him.

Despite the eerie similarity of Biden’s actions to those that are supposed to constitute “high crimes and misdemeanors” warranting the impeachment of President Trump, Biden and his supporters dare anyone to find anything illegal in his use of his official position to threaten to withhold aid to Ukraine unless it stifled a criminal investigation of his son’s company.

I think I have solved that riddle. An Office of Government Ethics regulation prohibits all government employees from using their offices “for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity.” That would seem to be directly on point, but alas, the definition of government “employees” to which the regulation applies specifically excludes the president and vice president. That exclusion is apparently because the president and vice president are subject to impeachment, which is likely the exclusive constitutional remedy for their misdeeds while in office.

Admittedly, there are distinctions between what Biden did and what Trump did. Trump was trying to restart an investigation by a foreign government into plausible violations of its laws, but what Trump asked for never actually happened. Biden, on the other hand, successfully killed an investigation into possible violations of Ukrainian and U.S. laws against bribery by Burisma. Biden appears to have misused his government position to obstruct the criminal justice system of another country so that an ongoing investigation would not embarrass him politically, whereas Trump is accused of trying to induce a foreign country to interfere in our elections by making information about those misdeeds by his rival public.

What Trump did was to ask a foreign government to investigate a potentially impeachable offense by a political rival. That’s the real issue underlying the current impeachment debate. The Democrats and their media allies want to cover that up by calling it “dirt” or a “smear,” but the correct term for what Biden did, and what Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate, is a potentially impeachable offense by Biden that may also have been a violation of foreign and U.S. bribery laws by Burisma.

Fairness demands that we apply the same standards to both Biden and Trump.

What’s sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander.

Isn't there a couple of investigations going on right now with the AG's office. I forget the names, they don't get a lot of news coverage about all the supposed back door shenanigans of the previous administration?

I have no issue about investigating Biden, I doubt the Dem's would either, if, and this is a big if, the Rep's would actually look at the Impeachment hearings, and the Biden investigation as "separate". But seems neither of your two parties can see things as individual.