Biden/Harris: A Presidency for All Americans

[Commando]

lol

This isn't even a fair fight.

Why does it look like she just got punched in the nose in every picture I see of her?

[Northwestcoug]

The bar is so low for Biden/Harris right now, all they need to do is just be competent leaders, and they'll be remembered as a great presidential team. They don't need help from someone in the press memory-oling a joke in poor taste that no one remembers:

https://reason.com/2021/01/22/the-wa...ood-and-water/

I'm sure this will get the expected traction from the 'librul media' howlers, and if it turns out that it is what it seems, the journalist will deserve every bit of scorn. Worse, I wonder if someone on the Harris team asked them to alter the story, and they complied.

C'mon. Criminal justice reform voters have already held their noses and voted for Biden/Harris, just because Trump was so bad. Don't do something that's so easy to be ridiculed.

As I'm writing this, the story has been updated. The WaPo has restored the original story. Of course, because they got caught.

[BlueK]

The bar is so low for Biden/Harris right now, all they need to do is just be competent leaders, and they'll be remembered as a great presidential team. They don't need help from someone in the press memory-oling a joke in poor taste that no one remembers:

The bar is low but with the Senate the way it is, very little can be done. Having the majority only means Senate committees get to talk about what the democrats want, but that's about it. Except for a very few exceptions nothing can be voted on unless there are 60 votes. That is not in the Constitution but for some it's pretty sacrosanct. And while the "filibuster" has been around for a long time it wasn't used very much until the end of the 20th century, and the current practice of it where it is applied every single stinking time to everything only dates back to the early 2000s. IMO it's dangerous because it is encouraging the alternate way of Presidents bending and/or breaking the Constitution through executive orders. The Framers meant for the Senate to decide on a majority basis except for a couple of exceptional things like impeachment and amending the Constitution. They didn't mean for what we have today. If you don't like what the Senate passes, well, that's why we have another election in two years.

[frank ryan]

So Biden will keep Wray on at the FBI. I'm okay with this. I think he's a decent human being and wasn't a Trump stooge. I want to know more about how the FBI handled the insurrection at the Capitol.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/21/polit...den/index.html

[Now who’s the dean?]

Well. I hate this. I guess Biden might be only 10066950431x better than Trump.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bide...ry?id=75462054


**And I don’t agree with that in the workplace**

[Bo Diddley]

Well. I hate this. I guess Biden might be only 10066950431x better than Trump.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bide...ry?id=75462054


**And I don’t agree with that in the workplace**

I like it. It keeps our tax dollars here, and reduces our dependence on foreign manufacturing.

[wapiti]

I like it. It keeps our tax dollars here, and reduces our dependence on foreign manufacturing.

I don't like the corruption and over-spending that will result from this. Free markets win.

[BigFatMeanie]

I don't like the corruption and over-spending that will result from this. Free markets win.

I agree with you in high-level principle but I think there is some deeper nuance to this stuff.

In many cases, buying from overseas suppliers is not really participating in a free market. Sometimes overseas suppliers are government subsidized, or counterfeit, or criminal, or using stolen IP/tech, or made with forced/slave labor. Obviously there is a spectrum of practices here. A free market generally presumes a level playing field but when it comes to international trade, the playing field is far from level.

Of course the protection of the supply chain can be taken to an extreme and result in all kinds of negative consequences but I think protection of supply chain for critical resources is a legitimate national interest that even true believers in limited government would be wise to consider supporting to some degree.

[Bo Diddley]

I don't like the corruption and over-spending that will result from this. Free markets win.

Has the Berry Amendment been good or bad for America?

[Moliere]

Well. I hate this. I guess Biden might be only 10066950431x better than Trump.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bide...ry?id=75462054


**And I don’t agree with that in the workplace**

This is a longheld policy of the Dems that Trump had stolen. I don't really like it either and given worldwide supply chain it's pretty ridiculuous but it makes some old-timers on teh Dems side happy.

[Pelado]

This is a longheld policy of the Dems that Trump had stolen. I don't really like it either and given worldwide supply chain it's pretty ridiculuous but it makes some old-timers on teh Dems side happy.

There definitely are things that the US should build "in-house", so to speak - especially when it comes to the Department of Defense. I don't want our military dependent on parts/equipment from China/Russia/etc, even if it costs more to build domestically than it would by outsourcing to foreign powers.

My guess, though, is that the proposed changes are much less about protecting the United States' sovereign interests and more about sending work to the domestic manufacturing unions that could have been done much more economically elsewhere.

[Now who’s the dean?]

This is a longheld policy of the Dems that Trump had stolen. I don't really like it either and given worldwide supply chain it's pretty ridiculuous but it makes some old-timers on teh Dems side happy.

True. I’d greatly prefer an “anywhere but China” policy to a made in America policy because it’s much better economic policy and should we ever end up in a situation where a significant portion of the world sides with China over us, being able to produce our own TV’s and shoes won’t matter much.


**And I don’t agree with that in the workplace**

[BlueK]

LOL Rasmussen


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...oval-7320.html

[Pelado]

LOL Rasmussen


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...oval-7320.html

one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the-others-one-of-these-things-just-doesnt-belong 2mp.jpg

[BlueK]

I would point out that Rasmussen is using a base of "likely voters" fot this, which is dumb on at least a couple of layers:

-- the next election is almost two years away, so is it really relevant for measuring the level of Americans' satisfaction with Biden's performance?
-- even if it does matter to only care about what "likely voters" think, how accurately can it be determined right now what the nature of the turnout will be in 2022? If we've learned anything from the last few election cycles it's that this is no longer easy to predict.

For what it's worth, Rasmussen seems to have a little bit of an agenda to make Republicans look good, and they do that by oversampling or overweighting certain demos like older white voters in rural areas, couched in the explanation that they're representing "likely voters." I wish they had been right in 2012 though because Romney would have won and we could have avoided the Trump disaster as well as seeing the GOP intent on taking a blowtorch to our Constitution to prop him up.