Jill Biden says American people know her husband isn't racist

[DonViejo]

AP July 9, 2019, 4:33 a.m.

WASHINGTON — Jill Biden says the American people ‘‘didn’t buy’’ any insinuation during the Democratic presidential debate that her husband, former Vice President Joe Biden, is racist.

In an interview that aired Monday on CNN, the former second lady was asked about Sen. Kamala Harris’ comments last month. The California senator started out by saying she didn’t think Joe Biden was racist, but she criticized him for defending his work with segregationist senators and for opposing mandatory busing of students to desegregated public schools.

Jill Biden says as soon as she heard the words ‘‘I do not believe you are a racist,’’ she thought, ‘‘Uh oh, what’s coming next?’’

She says, ‘‘The American people know Joe Biden. They know his values. They know what he stands for. And they didn’t buy it.’’

###

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2019/07/09/jill-biden-says-american-people-know-her-husband-isn-racist/iktWmlUeQiFfoAmraiyCwJ/story.html

[Demit]

1. I like how she says, "the one thing you cannot say about Joe is that he's a racist."

Kamala Harris didn't say he was. So that's a deflection from what Harris was actually criticizing. A straw man Jill Biden builds so she can knock it down. I understand a wife's instinct to defend her husband, but really.

[SouthernProgressive]

3. She makes perfect sense. She is very smart and gets it.

This isn't "womanly" instinct to stand by her man. Seriously? That's where you went with it. It's a good campaign move and you are putting Jill Biden in the good little dotting wife category. She is better than that.

[Demit]

12. But that IS the category she's in. She's not a campaign worker, she's his wife.

I didn't call her little, I didn't call what she said womanly. That's you reading far too much into what I said.

My point is that she deliberately diverted attention away from what Harris was criticizing during the debate.

Of course it's a good campaign move. But it isn't honestly addressing the question of Joe Biden's warm recollections of working with a segregationist on anti-busing legislation that they both agreed with, it's deflecting away from it.

[SouthernProgressive]

14. She is a doctor.

A teacher. Second Lady of the US for eight years. A teacher. Founder of the Biden Breast Health Initiative and co-founder of other successful programs. A wife. A mother.

She makes numerous statements for the campaign.

You define her as "she's his wife" and "not a campaign worker."

She is directly on point and well within her scope. Not stepping out of her lane or deflecting, as you are stating.

[Demit]

18. She evaded the point, her resume notwithstanding.

The point that Kamala Harris was making was about Joe Biden's anti-busing legislation, and how he enlisted the aid of a segregationist to promote it. Jill Biden was not included in that interview to make scholarly rebuttals, or to talk about programs she has founded. She was there to sit beside her husband and talk about him.

Why you think I'm being derogatory about her, or dismissive of her, is beyond me.

[StarfishSaver]

22. Because it seems a black person must never question a white Democrat's civil rights record

If they do, no matter what they say or don't say, how they say it or don't say it, they're calling them a racist and therefore nothing else they say has any merit or is worthy of consideration.

[LanternWaste]

28. The great thing about standing behind implication is the plausible deniability it affords us.

"Kamala Harris didn't say he was."

The great thing about standing behind implication is the plausible deniability it affords us.

[Demit]

33. You can include Jill Biden in that, for implying that what Harris was REALLY saying was

something other than what she plainly said: “I do not believe you are a racist.”

Kamala Harris is well aware of Joe Biden's support of civil rights. It would be foolish AND inaccurate to accuse him of being a racist. She wanted to make it clear right off the bat that her intent wasn't to put Biden in the same category as the white supremacist Eastland. She was getting that out of the way—and don't forget it was coupled with a statement complimenting him for committing to the importance of finding common ground—so she could address what she DID want to criticize him for.

To imply that Harris meant the opposite of what she said might be a good campaign tactic, but it is not playing fair.

[still_one]

2. The ascertion by some that Kamala Harris never called Joe Biden a racist because she prefaced her

comments about Biden with, "I know you are not a racist", is an attempt to cast doubt in other peoples minds that "perhaps he is"

This is politics, and no one is that naïve

[SouthernProgressive]

4. Sorry to say that you are wrong.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287195592#post1

[still_one]

6. This is directly from the transcript of what Kamala Harris said:

"I’m going to now direct this to Vice President Biden. I do not believe you are a racist and I agree with you when you commit yourself to the importance of finding common ground."

[SouthernProgressive]

7. "and no one is that nave"

That is the part I think you are wrong about. If those acting as if they don't get it aren't naive, then their motives are really bad.

I do agree with the overall point you made.

"you're not a racist, but...."

[still_one]

8. Appreciate the clarification. I was trying to say the opposite, that people know exactly what was

up with that discussion between Harris and Biden.

I sure didn't mean to say that those who didn't see that had some type of nefarious designs, but I can see how it could come out that way.


Thanks

[Skya Rhen]

5. Especially not the man's wife - Jill is far from naive....

[still_one]

9. Yes

[Kahuna7]

11. When you preface a statement with, I really don't think so and so, BUT....

You really do think so and so....

[treestar]

16. Yes, that was obviously followed by "but" (even if not literally) which negates the statement

And the assumption that opposing busing is equal to being a racist, which is not a sure thing. Or that working things out with Senators who did exist and can't be written out of history means you are as racist as they were. That's questionable too.

It is admitted that it was to try to get some of Biden's AA support! Whether it worked, and if it worked for anything more than a short time, is not certain.

[StarfishSaver]

10. I thought it was time to let this go?

At least no one can blame Harris for "keeping this going."

[still_one]

13. The door was opened, and the media will pursue it until they think they can't get anymore traction

from it

[StarfishSaver]

15. Sure. The media's gonna do what the media's gonna do?

But why repost the story here - especially since the same story from a different outlet was already posted at least once in this forum? That's not the media churning it up ... It sounds like some people here want to keep the story going - while wringing their hands and complaining that Harris "just won't let it go."

[treestar]

17. Jill Biden was asked about it

So it's still going. Harris did not accept the apology and that had it going yesterday.

Unless something happens before Mueller testifies, they will still be playing this up at least until then.

[StarfishSaver]

19. Please

Someone being "asked about it" isn't Harris' fault and it certainly doesn't mean it needs to be posted here and if it is posted here, the people posting it should stop complaining that Harris and her supporters "just won't let it go."

In fact, I recall some of those same people trashing Harris for talking about the same thing when responding to questions about it just a few days ago.

And Harris comment about Biden's apology - in which she said she applauded him for saying it, hardly a "refusal to accept his apology" - was several days ago, but people won't let that go either.

I see what's happening here. Plenty of people are refusing to let this go, but it's not Harris.

[Skya Rhen]

20. It's up to her and her campaign to find a way to stop the bleeding.

[StarfishSaver]

21. Ahhh.

First, she needed to "let it go." Now it's her responsibility to force YOU to "let it go." And your continued insistence on churning it up is her fault, not yours.

It must be exhausting dragging those goalposts around the field. I admire the stamina!

[Skya Rhen]

24. The arrow was not released from his bow...

[treestar]

26. We will probably only let it go when something new comes along

Kamala made her move, and it has consequences. It surprises me that her side is the one saying let it go. I was sick of hearing it played over and over to the point her voice started to sound annoying. But the Biden made an apology and that brought on another round and supposedly the apology was wanted.

[treestar]

25. I didn't say it was her fault, though she did start it, so

she can hardly complain if it lasts longer than planned or how long it lasts.

DU talks about what the pundits talk about. The pundits aren't going to let go until they get something new.

[mcar]

29. Yep

People are blaming Harris for keeping this going when it is obviously not true. It seems Team Biden thinks it's a winning strategy.

[EffieBlack]

31. I can't wait to see how they'll attack the next candidate to go after Biden's record

when they can’t attack them as an angry black woman too bold and “ambitious” (i.e., uppity) for her own good.

[Odoreida]

23. Though he's not my first choice ...

... I have no particular problem with Joe.

[awesomerwb1]

27. "I do not believe you're a racist...but..."

[Turin_C3PO]

30. Of course he's not.

His record proves it.

[ucrdem]

32. I knew he was going to take a hit but not from Harris and not like this.

This is not what I voted for.