2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBiden Shocks Hillary Crowd by Stating “Bernie Sanders Doing a Helluva Job”
Im not a populist. But Bernie Sanders, hes doing a helluva job, said Biden, adding that Bernie Sanders was doing a great job exciting his crowds.
The room was filled with Hillary Clinton donors, so the comment came as a shock to the room, according to Politico.
http://ringoffireradio.com/2015/09/biden-shocks-hillary-crowd-by-stating-bernie-sanders-doing-a-helluva-job/
Half-Century Man
(5,279 posts)Just saying.
Chemisse
(30,793 posts)I can just imagine the scene. He blurts out the truth and awkward silence ensues.
senz
(11,945 posts)I like him, too. Biden's a nice guy. (And kinda cute, too.)
Chemisse
(30,793 posts)He can acknowledge Bernie's success without endorsing him.
senz
(11,945 posts)Your comment helped me see that the remark was rather sour. Especially, now that I parse it, the phrase "his crowds."
Gawd I hate the establishment. Or, as you younguns like to say nowadays, TPTB.
Phooey. There goes another nice guy out of my personal pantheon.
Well, thanks anyway. 'Tis better to see clearly than not to see at all. Or something. And one is never too old to lose one's naïveté. Not that there isn't a lot more where that came from. Therefore, Chemisse, you are hereby authorized to remove the scales from my eyes whenever you deem fit. Or attempt to. No kidding; I will not take offense.
Thanks.
senz
(11,945 posts)Chemisse
(30,793 posts)It seemed a gallant but inelegant remark to me, but you may be right, maybe it was a pointed jab at Hillary.
senz
(11,945 posts)Your insight about acknowledging without endorsing revealed how adroit this long-time politician is. That's when the phrase "his crowds" suddenly seemed a very deliberate choice of words -- which is also rather insulting to the American people's desire to be free of a totally rigged system that has slowly been killing us. And that kinda shocked me.
Working for Obama's reelection in a local office with huge cardboard replicas of Barack and Joe by the door, I became rather attached to the gallant, seductive smile of that handsome fox, Joe Biden. And he always seems sweet, and probably is, in many ways. But he's no friend to Bernie, I now see -- which means he's no friend to me. So, yeah, Joe's dropped pretty far all of a sudden.
He's probably considering a bid in response to requests by the Democratic PTB, in fear of Hillary's slippage and Bernie Sanders' unexpected popularity. They need to keep it centrist (or, less euphemistically, not entirely Democratic). But if it were solely between Hillary and Joe -- no Bernie in the equation -- I'd still probably pick Joe.
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)telling the truth is akin to farting. Same reaction--awkward silence.
senz
(11,945 posts)It just isn't done.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)... courtesy of Marc Caputo, subject of:
Did Newt Gingrich Out Brit Hume's Dead Gay Son?
The rumor, in brief, is as follows: In the summer of 1997, the Hill's Sandy Humethe then-28-year-old son of Fox News' Brit Humebroke a blockbuster story about four GOP congressman who plotted, and failed, to overthrow Newt Gingrich as Speaker. One of those men was Bill Paxon, a New York Republican who was married to fellow Congresswoman Susan Molinari. Another of the plotters, Majority Leader Dick Armey, scuttled the coup when he learned that Paxon, and not he, would replace Gingrich. Armey later disavowed the whole attempt and claimed not to have been involved.
A few months later, in February 1998, Paxon launched an attempt to unseat Armey from his leadership position. Just days later, Sandy Hume killed himself with a gunshot to the head. Just days after that, Paxon suddenly and inexplicably resigned and never returned to public life. Almost immediately, rumors began flying that Hume and Paxon had been having an affair, and that Armey had threatened to out them. Hence the suicide and the sudden resignation. The theory was common knowledge among the D.C. press corps, but it never made it to print (as far as I can tell) beyond the dark corners of the internet and an angry passage, years later, in Joe Scarborough's Rome Wasn't Burnt in a Day accusing Armey of smearing Hume. (Scarborough's take was later picked up in this Huffington Post piece.)
But today, pegged to a conference call with Molinari organized by the Romney campaign and designed to bash Newt Gingrich, the Miami Herald's Marc Caputo has rehashed the "imbroglia" in a blog post, shining more light on the rumor (though without any reporting) than it has seen in more than a decade. But Caputo adds a new wrinkle to the tale: "Some" blame Gingrich, and not just Armey, he says, for the threat to go public with information about Hume and Paxon's alleged relationship.
Fascinating stuff.
BTW, heckuva job, Bernie!
senz
(11,945 posts)sociopaths. Corporate CEOs, maybe 85%.
Bernie Sanders is not in that category. So what do we do? We, the people, are screwed without some kind of revolution, and Bernie wants to launch a political revolution, so are we going to have to sit by and watch the animals destroy this good, courageous, exceptional man? (Yes, of course I signed the petition to get SS protection for him but am not convinced that's anywhere near enough.)
Are there alternatives? No, not jaded, cynical alternatives; I'm thinking imaginative, surprising, clever, amazing alternatives. Out-of-the-box alternatives that the demons can't foresee. I hope some of our better minds, people with eyes wide open and ideals fully intact -- such as Laura Poitras, Edward Snowden, Julian Assange, Naomi Klein, Glenn Greenwald, and others who do not come readily to mind at this moment (weak mind) -- are working on it. And I hope they will also consider ways in which Bernie can be protected.
Don't you hate knowing this kind of stuff and being helpless to do anything about it, OilemFirchen? Doesn't the helplessness just get you? If I were a big strong young man instead of a weak little ol' lady, I'd...better not say what I'd like to do...
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Just curious.
senz
(11,945 posts)I'd really like to hear what you have to say. You seem kind of interesting, and if my thoughts sound bumper-sticker simplistic to you, then I'd love to hear your thoughts on this or other subjects. Enlighten me.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)1) Sanders has had decades to "launch a political revolution". He's not an ordinary Joe; rather, he's been one of 535 individuals who've been in a rarefied position to affect real change, yet hasn't made a ripple. Perhaps he's not the right vehicle for such change, or perhaps "the people" are not clamoring for it. I suspect both.
2) Your list of "alternatives" (to what, I'm not sure) is hardly inspiring, unless you're one who eschews deep thinking in favor of poorly-articulated antagonistic rhetoric. I'll exempt Naomi Klein from the observation, though I haven't any idea why she was included in the first place.
3) As I don't believe that this country is in a crisis, I'm hardly the one to answer your entreaties.
There's nothing interesting about me. I'm a simple specimen, living my life with the understanding that everything's complicated, that every individual is unique and that every circumstance is different. I'm a predictable pragmatist who believes that, accordingly, change can usually only be incremental and that each and every increment should be designed to lead to a better system.
Thanks for the opportunity!
senz
(11,945 posts)and find nothing at all wrong with your m.o. as expressed. Addressing your points 1 and 3 could take a long time and probably too much arthritic hand activity, so let me direct your attention to a Ted talk (and transcript for those of us who prefer to read) that pretty much explains it:
https://www.ted.com/talks/nick_hanauer_beware_fellow_plutocrats_the_pitchforks_are_coming?
Transcript:
https://www.ted.com/talks/nick_hanauer_beware_fellow_plutocrats_the_pitchforks_are_coming/transcript?language=en
Thanks for your thoughtful response, OilemFirchen.
druidity33
(6,435 posts)This part of the statement also intrigues me. What is he inferring?
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Just a guess. Either way, I think he wanted to remind the audience that he's one of them.
druidity33
(6,435 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)jfern
(5,204 posts)DrBulldog
(841 posts)Thank you, Joe!
7962
(11,841 posts)The faithful are hitting the juries hard
silenttigersong
(957 posts)supporters are being so thin skinned because they think Hillary is going down.My recent exp ,with du jury has me them they are like bullies.
senz
(11,945 posts)it makes perfect sense. And they were thin-skinned long before it became rather obvious that she is slipping. It's their nature. And, one fears, hers as well.
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)I wonder if it reflects how he'd campaign.
"Im not a populist ..." "but <inset populist policy here>"
He might think he'd do well by splitting the difference between HRC and Sanders (triangulation).
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)Bernie is saying what most Washington insiders dare not mention
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)as an alternative to Hillary if she can't generate enthusiasm. Meh. Biden and Hillary are pretty close to the same policies, as far as I know, fighting for backing by the same donors. I don't really see this as Biden advocating for Bernie in any way.
And that I'm not a populist" remark? Wow. No, Joe, you're not.
senz
(11,945 posts)have led me to the conclusion that Biden is most certainly not advocating for Bernie. If anything, he was indicating that he is aware of the "Bernie problem." Which should tell us that TPTB, like Sauron, have their eye on Bernie Sanders.
All of which leads to the meta-conclusion that DU is most certainly informative and educational. Which is more than one can say for most of the message boards out there. (Ah, but the fighting, the pointless infighting...or is this just human nature and not at all avoidable? Which, I've long thought, would be an excellent reason for intelligent extraterrestrials to steer clear of this misleadingly beautiful. beckoning little blue green planet.)
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)clearly that Dems have to lead the way to get money out of our system, because until we do 'nothing else can be accomplished'.
IF he runs considering the strong words he used, also saying that it isn't an excuse for Dems to say that they HAVE to take it because the other guys do it, how can HE accept Corporate Donations himself without his own words coming back to haunt him?