Joe Biden's Frantic Defense of the Status Quo

[BeckyDem]

The former vice president's unending promises of reconciling with Republicans may be designed to forestall a future of radical demands.

By Osita Nwanevu

November 18, 2019

With the entry of former Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick into the Democratic primary race, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg exploring a bid, and Pete Buttigieg, mayor of South Bend, Indiana, rising in the polls, Joe Biden will likely spend the next few weeks reemphasizing the case for his presidency to party moderates. Part of that case will include a claim he has made repeatedly since he entered the race—that under a Biden administration, the Republican Party, freed from the pressures and influences of the Trump presidency, would be more willing to work with Democrats to pass major legislation, including new health care and climate bills.

One of the oddest renditions yet of this argument came last week during a CNN town hall. “It has become so, so difficult for Republicans to be able to—unless they have real courage—stand up and take on the president even if they think he should be taken on, because he has such vitriol,” he told the audience. “He has no empathy. And what happens is he controls now somewhere between 30 and 35 percent of the electorate, which is the bulk of the Republican Party. I’ll give you an example.”

Biden’s example was a recounting of the Merrick Garland nomination, which Senate Republicans—during the Obama administration, before Trump—blocked. He described confronting those senators. “I said, ‘Do you realize what you’re doing to the Constitution?’ They said, ‘We know, Joe. But here’s the deal. I’m in a state where if the Koch brothers drop in $10, $12 million dollars, I will lose a primary.’” He closed this tangent with a jab at Trump. “The politics has gotten just so out of whack,” he said. “But it’s going to come back and whack this guy.”

Over the course of his campaign, two explanations for Biden’s promise of a political reconciliation to come have been offered. One is that Biden genuinely believes that the Republican Party will change after Trump leaves office. In this view, Biden’s own personal history and career—the relationships he built with segregationists in the Senate, his work on now-reviled bipartisan legislation like the 1994 crime bill—have inspired within him a deep and abiding faith in the possibility of political comity and co-governance with the right. This faith persists against all contrary evidence provided not only by the Trump era—in which the party has, among other things, abetted Trump’s attacks on Biden’s own son—but also by the Obama era, during which Biden saw, as his own recollection of the Garland saga illustrates, the GOP both frustrate Democrats with strategic intransigence and lean in to a conspiratorial racism that presaged Trump and will endure after his presidency.

https://newrepublic.com/article/155749/joe-bidens-frantic-defense-status-quo

Warren 2020!!

[LonePirate]

1. If I, a regular citizen, said this, I would be laughed at and mocked for being naive and/or stupid.

[TomCADem]

2. So Biden Is The Same As Trump (Status Quo)?

Nope.

[BeckyDem]

3. Not stated nor implied but that is your take nevertheless.

[sweetloukillbot]

5. Trump is the status quote right now

So if Biden is defending it, he’s defending a Trump. So we’re back to the just the same argument.

[BeckyDem]

8. Nonsense.

[WA-03 Democrat]

6. Headline is misleading

The “status quo” is tRump.

[sweetloukillbot]

21. Apparently that's nonsense.

News to the kids in cages and the families being seperated, and the allies being abandoned and such...

[Magoo48]

72. The status quo is not IQ45; Agent Orange is a horrid, dangerous anomaly.

The status quo is pre-IQ45 America. In light of Climate Catastrophe, status quo is a death sentence.

[Hav]

102. You should look up the definition of status quo

Last edited Mon Nov 18, 2019, 03:27 PM - Edit history (1)

instead of making one up in contradiction to the literal meaning of the term.
Also, how disingenuous to tie that to climate change and insinuate that any of our candidates would ignore it. Just because status quo was wrongly used in connection with one candidate doesn't mean you can just add anything else that may fit the definition but not the candidate's positions.

[sweetloukillbot]

129. This

It's arguments like this that led to Trump.

[Magoo48]

170. Nice avoidance, thanks for the technical definition.

I believe my meaning was clear. Business as usual with 45, or all who came before him, will be a disaster for our next generations. Unless all systems are reviewed through the lens of Climate Crisis, we will not even begin to cope with what’s coming. I see only two candidates with a chance who are willing to begin this paradigm swing.

[treestar]

141. Yep!

Let's not forget that! It was going on and on about the status quo not being good enough that got us Trump! That Dotard barely won the EC and cheated to do it, so most Americans were happy with things and the direction they were going. Now we've gone backward.

[TomCADem]

145. Do you know what "status quo" means?

I see below that you are arguing that Trump is not the status quo, which leads me to think there is some confusion regarding what the term means.

Also, is the OP meant to be pro-Warren? It is just more confusing than anything.

[BeckyDem]

147. I'm not the one who is confused by the OP's intent nor meaning of the term.

It is no where in the OP nor is it implied to be pro- a specific individual but does speak to bold policy in its conclusions and suggestions.

(The entire political infrastructure built around the status quo—the foundations and think tanks, the strategists and consultants, the respected donors and esteemed thought leaders—would then begin to collapse. Figures like Biden and Obama would find themselves helpless and irrelevant.)

[Kurt V.]

151. +1

[BeckyDem]

163. ...........

[boomer_wv]

4. If status quo

Mean returning to the Obama years.... count me in.

[BeckyDem]

7. I believe you missed the point of the OP.

Koch money was there and powerful BEFORE Trump, so what will change the Republicans minds?

[Demsrule86]

37. Biden bashing is not hard to miss...and of course it appears as if your candidate

is slipping...The trouble is polls show millions want the two sides to work together on some issues and the last two elections clearly show, we need to run a perceived moderate like Joe...If Warren doesn't win Iowa, I think she is in real trouble...New Hampshire is important too...and then those states with real Democratic demographics kick in. and I believe Biden will be the candidate on Super Tuesday despite OP like this one...we always see these sort of desperate articles when Warren is perceived to be down...only this time I think she is down-maybe for the count. I will vote for any Democratic nominee not matter what vote blue no matter who.

[Thekaspervote]

41. Agree!!

[Demsrule86]

105. I wonder how many attacks Biden has endured from Trump, here and elsewhere? Yet

he is still the front runner.

[emmaverybo]

110. THIS

[Demsrule86]

111. Biden showing everyday, that he can withstand Trump's attacks.

[emmaverybo]

118. And Bernie surrogates' before he even entered and Harris's debate hit which MSM crowed

about for days while dismissing any pushback and all his rivals’ and their supporters’ attacks. As I
expected, he knew what he was getting into and was ready for it. He’s been rising to challenges all
his life. Proud to support him.

[Demsrule86]

124. I am also very proud and think some who search for attack articles and post vicious commentary

about Biden are becoming increasingly desperate...and that I don't get. He is a good guy. He was in the Obama administration...the best president in my lifetime.

[SterlingPound]

14. meaning the biden years

and just look at his lack of substance before he got the nod for VP

Biden was fading away into obscurity


and that is where he should return too.

"nothing in his record even suggests he’s progressive guy. In fact, pretty much everything in his record suggests he’s not a progressive guy. It’s the usual story of the Democratic party. You know, like Obama ran as a populist and really, you know, and made all sorts of progressive noises and his appointment was basically a Citigroup administration stuffed with people from Wall Street. And I wouldn’t look for too much different than a Biden administration."

https://btlonline.org/joe-bidens-legislative-record-anything-but-progressive/

[Thekaspervote]

44. Why not post something positive about your candidate of choice. Negative posting does nothing

To change the minds of voters

[SterlingPound]

60. because this is a thread about biden being for our failing status quo

and i am against that

and so my comments will reflect it


being critical isn't always a bad thing

and it isn't tearing down to talk about someones record in office

[Demsrule86]

106. You mean like during the Obama years? Sorry most of us would kill to return to that time of sanity.

It won't work and this sort of thing doesn't improve your candidates chance...maybe the opposite.

[SterlingPound]

161. I would as well compaired to the trump years

if you need a vacuum of zero criticism when it comes to choosing who to vote for

well lets just say you are not who i would be turning too for advice

on who to vote for

[SouthernIrish]

157. Yes

Have seen several just today by the same people. Lift your candidate up but don't knock mine down. Dems need to learn how to do that.

[treestar]

143. Defend the premise that Obama's cabinet was a "citigroup administration stuffed

with people from Wall Street."

Explain how they were not competent and knowledgeable to do the jobs they were appointed to and confirmed by the elected body the Senate.

Explain how that hurt the economy. Oh, wait.

[Poeraria]

34. I second that, but state it a bit differently.

Not return to Obama, but continue the work of Obama.

[treestar]

140. +1

[SterlingPound]

9. +1000%

"The former vice president's unending promises of reconciling with Republicans may be designed to forestall a future of radical demands."


you dont need a crystal ball to see this coming.

[WA-03 Democrat]

15. Seems like trump

I would like a president who serves all Americans. Not just the ones who voted for them or are
Pure enough to person's opinion.

Biden is a proven Democratic Executive and Legislative leader who will win WI, PA, MI, OH and FL. No crystal required.

[SterlingPound]

18. and then continue to do the bidding of wall street and the insurance companies

just as his history of legislation voting reflects.

[Thekaspervote]

46. This is your opinion...and that's all it is...an opinion

[SterlingPound]

49. when there is a voting record it is more than just opinion

[Thekaspervote]

59. And indeed he has a great voting record on civil rights women's right gun safety

[SterlingPound]

66. Now that is an opinion

Rated 60% by the ACLU, indicating a mixed civil rights voting record. Biden scores 60% by the ACLU on civil rights issues

[WA-03 Democrat]

68. Go Joe Go

Yes, let’s measure the full record of each candidate. I see no foreign policy experience in Elizabeth Warren’s background.

But let’s close all the banks and credit card companies tomorrow. The barter system is great.

Let’s bring the mother fucking revolution now!

Blow everything up immediately. Cat shit vs Dog shit right?

This populism isn’t just on the right.

[SterlingPound]

70. no one is saying close the banks and CC's tomorrow but you keep rocking on

[Demsrule86]

125. Why not list bills Warren successfully passed during her time in the Senate...and perhaps you could

explain her votes on eliminating the medical device tax.

[Demsrule86]

113. Biden didn't even invest with Wall Street when he as in the Senate, so as not to have

the appearance of impropriety. How did Sen. Warren make her fortune? I honestly don't know as I don't look for dirt on candidates who could win the nomination. Biden's history of legislation includes the violence against women act and two gun bills as well as other things. What has Sen. Warren accomplished during her time as a Senator? Please list in order of importance...

[MrsCoffee]

180. Consulting and book royalties.

Why wouldn’t you look it up instead of insinuating something improper?

[Thekaspervote]

79. And you don't think your endless tongue in cheek negatives aren't bashing?? Really??

[LanternWaste]

87. Logical fallacies are better than crystal balls.

The editorial's use of the 'post hoc ergo prompter hoc' fallacy illustrates that quite accurately.

[Thekaspervote]

98. Crystal ball? That's your term!!

[still_one]

10. The last couple days there were threads going after Warren, now today there are threads going after

Biden

Wonderful

[BeckyDem]

11. Its called a primary.

If you find the content unfair, then say so.

[sweetloukillbot]

24. It's the disingenuousness

Calling Biden the Status Quo, bashing Obama's record, that sort of thing. But go on ignoring the Orange elephant in the room and keep blaming Biden and Obama for everything.

[BeckyDem]

27. Republicans are not going to work with Biden.

That is the essence of the OP.

[sweetloukillbot]

38. Giving lip service to attempting does no harm

Doesn't mean he will only do things that Republicans agree to.
And that still doesn't address this mysterious belief that Biden is the same as the status quo (Trump).

[BeckyDem]

52. You believe OP is equating Biden with Trump.

That misses the essence of the OP entirely.

[Demsrule86]

119. Yes, and I also believe that you can't attack Biden for his time as VP without attacking

Pres. Obama. This sort of thing will not help Sen. Warren or any candidate who does it.

[still_one]

62. My comment stands on its own, I don't need to justify it

[BeckyDem]

64. Which has no meaning in the context of the OP.

[BannonsLiver]

23. There's a "new one" apparently

Will leave it at that.

[elleng]

12. The New Republic USED to be worth it, and I subscribed;

no longer.

NOT useful to refer to VP Biden's approach as 'frantic.'

[BeckyDem]

13. Are you serious?

Do you really believe if no one writes critically then no one will think those thoughts?

[Peacetrain]

17. You know I almost put on the hipwaders to get through that pile of crap

[BeckyDem]

20. Because you believe you are objective on Biden.

[BannonsLiver]

26. Probably no more or less so than you are with Warren

It’s adorable how everyone thinks they’re so unique and special in their thinking they operate without bias. So precious.

[BeckyDem]

30. lol

[BannonsLiver]

31. I know right?

It’s often funny when one lacks the self awareness to see their own bias!

[BeckyDem]

39. You are funny, yes.

[BannonsLiver]

40. I know. But thanks, anyway.

I’ll let you get back to your completely unbiased posts about your candidate.

These posts are important since you are the only supporter of a candidate in history who is unbiased.

[BeckyDem]

47. Thanks for stopping by with all the "reasoning".

[BannonsLiver]

69. Awww you're so welcome

Thanks for showing us all what an “unbiased” supporter of a candidate looks like!

You keep on putting those biased supporters of other candidates in their place!1!11

[Peacetrain]

29. No no.. All in for Biden.. but crap is crap and not a walk through the tulip beds

New Republic has lost touch with reality. The republicans are not going to disappear, and we are going to have to figure out a way to work with them,, which means someone who knows which buttons to push to make them move on their side . How do you think he got the automatic weapons ban through in the first place.

NR is now getting Trumpian in its actions .. My way or the highway. (Not working out for Trump either anymore by the way).

[BeckyDem]

33. Figure out a way to work with them?

New Republic has lost touch with reality? Koch money has been there long before Trump and that is not going to change.

[Thekaspervote]

50. Keep pounding ... I'm sure you are changing a lot of voters minds!!

[BeckyDem]

56. More people are now for Warren than Biden here at DU.

It wasn't that way out of the gate, if that is what you meant.

[Thekaspervote]

61. The polls here on DU are far far from or reflect the nation and how they will vote

[BeckyDem]

67. Alrighty then.

[Peacetrain]

71. No no no.. its "Alrighty Now".. don't make me lose faith in you

And DU is not the voting public by any means..it is just people with pretty strong opinions who pay attention to politics a lot more than the average person.

[BeckyDem]

76. Yes, I heard you the first time.

[Thekaspervote]

80. Thank you!

[Peacetrain]

146. You betcha!!

[emmaverybo]

112. The poll at DU does not reflect a number of polls in a number of states where Biden leads. That

is because DU has a more progressive-leaning membership than the Dem electorate at large. How
can one use DU as a yardstick for Dems as a whole, in which the minority are progressives and the majority moderate to left of center?

[BeckyDem]

115. Funny how it is consistently been Biden supporters who say that.

The point is, people here changed their mind. That will likely continue as the race continues, imo. On edit, across the country is what I meant to add.

[emmaverybo]

120. You can predict whatever you want. People may well change their minds. Right now Biden leads

nationally and in the states we need to win the election despite taking on more attacks from more sources consistently than any other competitor.

P.S. New HarrisX poll shows some changes: Biden has gained 4 points; Sanders climbed to second place.

[BeckyDem]

122. The polls. ok

[Demsrule86]

121. The point is that people are not changing their minds about Biden...maybe Warren. Is she slipping?

[BeckyDem]

123. I think she has surprised a lot of people and will likely

continue to do so.

[Demsrule86]

132. Warren needs to win Iowa and New Hampshire or come damn close...neither Sanders nor Biden have to

do this. They don't have to prove electability...so we may be surprised all right but not in the way you mean.

[emmaverybo]

126. In the new HarrisX poll, yes. She has gone down to third place. Biden gained 4 points. Sanders

is in second now.

[elleng]

32. I did NOT say that, but I don't have to subscribe when I think it lost its way,

and surely don't have to read foolishness.

[BeckyDem]

36. Amazing.

[BeyondGeography]

16. Their base is nuts and the RWNJ machine keeps them frothing

Do a legislative deal with the Dems and you’ll get primaried by a well-funded true believer. Post-Trump it will be no different. Basically, they need to be crushed.

[BeckyDem]

19. Thank you.

How anyone who has watched money infiltrate the Republican Party and that miserable bastard Mitch revel in their wins and thinks with Trump gone there won't be more of the same is kidding themselves.

[TheRealNorth]

28. Sadly, this is the situation

The Republican party today isn't interested in cutting deals and bipartisan compromise. Their goal is absolute power and they will do anything to further that goal that they think they can get away with.

[Celerity]

35. the centre right needs to reclaim the Republican party, it will take decades but it must be done

How America Ends

A tectonic demographic shift is under way. Can the country hold together?

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/12/how-america-ends/600757/

Democracy depends on the consent of the losers. For most of the 20th century, parties and candidates in the United States have competed in elections with the understanding that electoral defeats are neither permanent nor intolerable. The losers could accept the result, adjust their ideas and coalitions, and move on to fight in the next election. Ideas and policies would be contested, sometimes viciously, but however heated the rhetoric got, defeat was not generally equated with political annihilation. The stakes could feel high, but rarely existential. In recent years, however, beginning before the election of Donald Trump and accelerating since, that has changed.

“Our radical Democrat opponents are driven by hatred, prejudice, and rage,” Trump told the crowd at his reelection kickoff event in Orlando in June. “They want to destroy you and they want to destroy our country as we know it.” This is the core of the president’s pitch to his supporters: He is all that stands between them and the abyss.

In October, with the spectre of impeachment looming, he fumed on Twitter, “What is taking place is not an impeachment, it is a COUP, intended to take away the Power of the People, their VOTE, their Freedoms, their Second Amendment, Religion, Military, Border Wall, and their God-given rights as a Citizen of The United States of America!” For good measure, he also quoted a supporter’s dark prediction that impeachment “will cause a Civil War like fracture in this Nation from which our Country will never heal.” Trump’s apocalyptic rhetoric matches the tenor of the times. The body politic is more fractious than at any time in recent memory. Over the past 25 years, both red and blue areas have become more deeply hued, with Democrats clustering in cities and suburbs and Republicans filling in rural areas and exurbs. In Congress, where the two caucuses once overlapped ideologically, the dividing aisle has turned into a chasm.

As partisans have drifted apart geographically and ideologically, they’ve become more hostile toward each other. In 1960, less than 5 percent of Democrats and Republicans said they’d be unhappy if their children married someone from the other party; today, 35 percent of Republicans and 45 percent of Democrats would be, according to a recent Public Religion Research Institute/Atlantic poll—far higher than the percentages that object to marriages crossing the boundaries of race and religion. As hostility rises, Americans’ trust in political institutions, and in one another, is declining. A study released by the Pew Research Center in July found that only about half of respondents believed their fellow citizens would accept election results no matter who won. At the fringes, distrust has become centrifugal: Right-wing activists in Texas and left-wing activists in California have revived talk of secession.

snip

great article

[BeckyDem]

45. Thank you for posting it.

[Kurt V.]

153. +1

[brutus smith]

22. +1000

Sorry Joe, but that reconciliation train left the depot a long, long time ago.

[beastie boy]

25. In a divided Congress, Biden makes perfect sense. And this is not status quo.

Status quo is GOP's refusal to work across the isle. Status quo is "my way or the highway". About time someone rejected it.

[BeckyDem]

42. Makes sense to his supporters.

[Thekaspervote]

54. Yes and since he's the front runner with great poll numbers it makes sense to a lot of voters!!

[BeckyDem]

58. Maybe, we'll see.

[Thekaspervote]

73. Here's some eye popping numbers you should consider NYTsienna poll

voters are fairly clear about what they would like from a Democrat. They prefer, by 82% to 11%, one who promises to find common ground over one who promises to fight for a progressive agenda; and they prefer a moderate over a liberal, 75% to 19%.


They support Biden over the president, 38% to 27%, but prefer the president to Warren, 37% to 20%. Sanders is in between, with the president leading him, 34% to 32%. This group voted for Trump by a smaller margin in 2016, 37% to 30%, with the rest casting ballots for minor candidates.

More at the link

https://www.yahoo.com/news/meet-swing-voters-might-decide-193019533.html

[BeckyDem]

77. We'll find out if he lasts before too long.

Polls are a funny thing.

[Thekaspervote]

82. Here's some more of what the experts have to say about your comment: Nate Silver 538

You'd think, if anything, the lesson "don't be dismissive of a candidate who maintains a polling lead for months with a working-class coalition despite constant predictions of his demise from Acela corridor elites" would have been *overlearned*. But, nope, same shit as last time.

[BeckyDem]

83. Experts, ok.

[Thekaspervote]

86. Oh so, you would rather give your opinion and say that polling experts know nothing? really??

[BeckyDem]

91. 2016

[Thekaspervote]

94. FYI Nate Silver's numbers for 2016 were very close.. you can look it up if you want

[BeckyDem]

95. You go with your experts.

Polls give you comfort, stay with them.

[Thekaspervote]

97. Better than the arm chair crap from the new Republic!

[BeckyDem]

101. I don't expect you to agree with it.

[beastie boy]

57. You bet!

And he has consistently had more support than any other Democrat! Perhaps it's because he makes sense.

[Thekaspervote]

92. Indeed! I want a president that is willing to wade into whatever pile of crap to secure

those 1-2 gop votes needed to pass an important piece of legislation. Example: Biden flying out to talk with John McCain to get him to vote no regarding the most recent attack on the ACA

Politics is a messy business... purity... better look elsewhere!!

[Hav]

43. Is "status quo" the new oligarchy or dynasties bs of 2016?

I see that popping up again and again here as if it's a distributed talking point. These buzzwords are thrown into everything as if they by themself constitute a valid and well-reasoned argument. They do not.
An often seen example: Hillary was the status quo and it gave us Trump.

It's boring, wrong, annoying and as the example shows, really just intellectually lazy.
And the article itself is another example of that laziness and fails right away. How is Biden "frantically" defending the status quo when the argument literally revolves around Biden's wish of going back to working together and a change from today's climate or in other words a change of the current status?

[Thekaspervote]

55. Oh the voice of sanity...thank you!!

[emmaverybo]

160. He is lambasted for wanting a "change from today's climate," as calling for embracing conservative

notions he has never s scribed to his whole political career This is a blatant spin in his campaign themes.

However, many apparently are ignoring such distortion, and so Biden remains in the lead, getting his unifying message out and holding consistently to doable, sensible plans that will carry us to progress on education, healthcare, climate change, and justice reform.

Further, he is the only candidate knowledgeable and experienced enough to lead us out of our FP morass, one that is dangerous to our and the world’s security. Out of step? No other candidate is as in step with the world situation and its perils as Biden.

[TidalWave46]

48. Sometimes people try too hard.....

and the end result reads like the article in the op.

[PhoenixDem]

51. After Trump, I'll take "normalcy"

even if some may want to call it status quo.

Go Joe !!!

[George II]

53. I'll ask for about the 50th time on this site:

What is the definition of "status quo"?

I've never gotten a straightforward answer.

[BeckyDem]

63. I have no idea what you have been told.

[Thekaspervote]

84. Since you seem to agree with the op about status quo, why don't you start.. let's hear it

[BeckyDem]

90. The Republicans are never going to work on policy that works against their money handlers, Koch.

That is the point of the OP.

[Thekaspervote]

96. And you think Biden is naive about that? You think that hammering a progressive agenda with a

Gop held senate is going to work

I will post this again

From NYT/Sienna poll
Voters are fairly clear about what they would like from a Democrat. They prefer, by 82% to 11%, one who promises to find common ground over one who promises to fight for a progressive agenda; and they prefer a moderate over a liberal, 75% to 19%.


They support Biden over the president, 38% to 27%, but prefer the president to Warren, 37% to 20%. Sanders is in between, with the president leading him, 34% to 32%. This group voted for Trump by a smaller margin in 2016, 37% to 30%, with the rest casting ballots for minor candidates.

[BeckyDem]

99. No, I believe it is wrong to campaign suggesting as he has that they will work with him

once Trump is gone.

[George II]

117. When I ask the question I never get an answer. That's my point.

[BeckyDem]

136. Yes you have. You may not like them and the responses follow from this post.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287126178#post4

[George II]

138. I've gotten responses but no answers.

[BeckyDem]

139. Keep playing and have a nice day.

[beastie boy]

65. I have a perfect definition for you, George:

"Status quo" is what follows "Biden" and "frantic". I believe "Disqualified!" figures into the same formula somewhere.

[still_one]

78. LOL!!! Excellent

[treestar]

142. along with "corporatist" "oligarch"

and "friend of Wall Street."

[BannonsLiver]

74. You should ask the OP

She is the first supporter of a candidate who is completely unbiased and objective. Other people are biased, not her. Just the other people.

[Thekaspervote]

88. Yes... just the others..

[still_one]

81. I may be mistaken, but I don't believe I have seen one Democratic candidate indicate that they won't

try to work with the opposition party

Gee, I guess all our prospective candidates must be "frantic" because they are not saying they won't try to work with republicans

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

93. Good question.

It usually seems to be used to define conditions that exist but that we don't like. But the dictionary definition is neutral: it's "the existing state of affairs, especially regarding social or political issues." The currently-existing state of affairs is Trump and Trumpitude and Trumpism, which I don't think any of us like; I really don't think Biden is defending anything Trumpic. So what is the existing state of affairs that he is allegedly defending "frantically"? If you ask me, "status quo" is just another one of those vague buzzwords that can be given a negative meaning which the word itself does not carry, and is then deployed disingenuously as a criticism. The status quo may or may not be a bad thing so one has to define it so we know what it is they are objecting to.

[betsuni]

158. The answer is that the alternative meaning of status quo is money in politics, corruption.

"Establishment" is used in the same way. It must be assumed that everyone and everything is corrupt because of money. Except for ... you know who.

The article says that if there are radical changes to the status quo, there will a new class, or no class, of leaders. Figures like Obama and Biden would "find themselves helpless and irrelevant." They are FRANTIC.

For proof of corruption, we are told Obama's administration was all Wall Street people and a Biden administration would be too, and to look at Biden's voting record for confirmation of corruption because something about Big Pharma.

The most magical of all the two-word slogans, used to enrage and disillusion: WALL STREET.

[stonecutter357]

89. good let's go Joe !

[TCJ70]

100. The "Lowered Expectations" campaign. N/t

[Otto Lidenbrock]

103. What's the solution?

It's very nice to say "dream big and fight hard" but that's just a catchphrase. A platitude. Everyone who is running whether they are for M4A or Public Option will fight hard for their proposal. Getting it done is another thing.

Fucking Trump fights hard for the DACA kids to lose their status but he can't get it done (thankfully).

[BeckyDem]

104. Valid question. I believe it begins with not suggesting Trump's departure will equate

with Republicans working with Biden on anything meaningful that is meaningful to us.

Fighting hard includes many things, one is supporting grassroots org across the country to defeat those seats, as aggressively as possible.

[Otto Lidenbrock]

109. do you think biden doesn't want to do that?

In the mid-terms last year he came off the sidelines and campaigned for many candidates for different races. During his vice presidency he was often the point man to join the trail for state/district campaigns. Therefore I am positive during his presidency he would like nothing more than to be able to have a democratic party majority. But here's the thing - we had that in 2009-10 and just about got the ACA passed because there are democratic senators of deeply red states whose votes count. When a more progressive opponent beats those senators in those areas, or those congressman in those districts that are not already fiercely blue then I'll have more confidence.

[BeckyDem]

114. I can't speak for why Biden has taken the issue of Republicans

voting with him once Trump is gone. It is not a good tactic, imo. The main way to win those seats is with policies that will change the lives of the people in those states for the better. The phony christian right/racists will stay home before they vote for any Dem, but they are not as large a voting block even in red states as some seem to believe.

[questionseverything]

156. how do we know biden will fight hard for the public option? he didnt last time

why is this time different?

[betsuni]

159. What do you mean Biden didn't fight hard for the public option?

[questionseverything]

168. do we have a public option i dont know about?

[betsuni]

169. ACA with a public option passed Congress. There weren't enough votes for it in the Senate.

What was Biden supposed to do about that? Threaten them?

[questionseverything]

173. since the aca passed using reconciliation (51 votes)

that really doesn't fly

and guess what ,he wont have the votes in the senate now either unless he uses reconciliation ,seriously what has changed?

as an x vp he gets tax payer funded healthcare for life

[betsuni]

175. Al Franken:

"Finally, on Christmas Eve, we passed the bill through the Senate. ... Then, suddenly, things got even harder. In January ... Scott Brown ... won the special election for Ted Kennedy's seat in Massachusetts. ... On top of that, our math problem had just gotten a lot worse, because once Brown took office in early February, that would be the end of our sixty-vote, filibuster-proof supermajority. ... Ordinarily, that wouldn't be a big deal. We'd convene a conference committee, hash out the differences, and then both chambers would vote to pass the unified bill that came out of the conference. But Republicans were still hell bent on stopping us from passing health care reform, and now that they once again had forty-one votes in the Senate, they could stop us from voting on that unified bill. ... There was only one solution: the House would have to pass the exact same bill we had just passed. Guess who didn't like that idea? House Democrats. Liberals wanted provisions from the House's more progressive bill, and Democrats from more conservative districts were now spooked by Brown's victory in Massachusetts. We were stuck. ... Finally, after a few hair-raising weeks of negotiations and arm-twisting, the House passed the Senate bill as it was by a 219-212 margin. We would later be able to make some minor adjustments through a complicated parliamentary procedure called 'reconciliation' which requires only fifty-one votes."

[onetexan]

107. Frantic?? Who writes this crap?

[emmaverybo]

130. Is "frantic" even in Biden's repertoire? He is steady as you go. Steadily he maintains the lead.

Steadily he will steer this country.

You go, Joe!
America and the world need you.

[onetexan]

150. Bingo! No one among the candidates is more steady than Joe.

[Aaron Pereira]

137. Usually someone with an interest in dividing the party or getting clicks.

We know Joe Biden and it would be nice if they would just present the information and skip the histrionics.

[onetexan]

149. U hit the nail on the head!

[KPN]

108. That about sums it up in my view.

I like Joe personally (well, I don't actually know him but you get my drift), but this is not his time, nor was it in the past apparently. He is living in that past as far as I'm concerned -- like "back in the day", "the good old days". We won't see comity between the parties for at least a generation or two -- and that means a younger generation.

[Demsrule86]

128. Neither Warren nor Sanders are younger...they are both above 70. In fact Sanders is older than Biden

These are the top three...in the words of Biden...come on man.

[KPN]

152. No, but they are supported by younger. Harris

Booker and Buttigieg are younger candidates as well.

All of them have an overall orientation and perspective that is better suited to today’s war-between-two-parties world in my view.

[BigMin28]

116. I love ya Mr. Biden

But to think the repubs are going to come to their senses and work with Democrats for the good of the American people is not realistic. They have been on the Democrats are the enemy tangent since Gingrich became Speaker in 1994. They are too far gone. Especially after trump.

[Demsrule86]

127. It is an election and voters want us to work with the other side...doesn't hurt to try. What is the

the alternative...because it is doubtful we will be able to get anything done without some Republicans...what is your plan? The courts are against us so don't expect EO's to work well.

[BigMin28]

134. I do not claim to have all the answers

We must work hard to take the Senate and the presidency. But thinking and hoping the republicans will somehow work with Democrats is akin to hoping an abusive spouse will change after 25 years.

[Demsrule86]

135. Even if we get the Senate, we still have to work with some Republicans...and we have will have

Senators who are moderate from purple states...no other way to get the Senate...He said he will try to work with GOP types...maybe on health care we can force some cooperation because it is costing them elections...don't know it won't hurt to try. And that sort of rhetoric is expected in a general...and the reason why in the end Biden will be the nominee ...my opinion. And by the way, the Senate is a heavy lift even with Biden as the nominee...he is of course the only one who can help with the Senate.

[treestar]

144. Yep and having a President that is

satisfactorily to the left would not change that. The Status Quo will continue. The Republicans may get tired of stonewalling anyway, but the Status Quo during Obama is the most they can get. It is out there to think the Republicans would work with Bernie! Or EW!

[Jewls2]

131. We lost a SC seat that was ours. That matters to some of us. Not easily forgotten or dismissed.

[tirebiter]

133. Racism, huh

Bernie voted for the 1994 Crime Bill. So, by the same logic, socialism must equal racism.

[The Valley Below]

148. I'm trying to think of anyone who is less "frantic" that "Rabid Joe" Biden. LOL.

Gimme a break!

[quickesst]

154. I have never seen Democrats....

.... make such a concerted effort to lose an election to repuglicans by attacking the only person who can defeat drump. Think I'm wrong? Go back and look at the six key states and the head-to-head matchups with each candidate. If one still thinks otherwise, they are just being willfully ignorant.

[emmaverybo]

164. Serving an ideology is simply more important than defeating Trump. But I find more disappointing

that a gift horse is being looked at in the mouth. Biden is far more qualified than the other top tier candidates. His tenure with Obama as VP, a powerful and hands-on VP, should speak to all Dems.
Furthermore, he has a message for all Americans about the urgency of this moment in terms of
our national security and the world’s as well as the existential crisis democratic values face, here, and internationally.

No other candidate has brought that out as strongly and persistently as Biden.

It would seem his thoughts on Marijuana, which is widely available regardless of fed policy, are more important than his opinion of the humanitarian crisis at our southern borders, about which he wrote such a thoughtful analysis, or Iran, or climate accords, or Russia, or India and Pakistan coming so close to a nuclear showdown or NK, China, the Mideast...

Honestly. Are we teenagers?

Yes, all those in prison for using marijuana should be let out and records expunged tomorrow.
My sense of decriminalization is that marijuana would not be a criminal offense regardless of state law.

[quickesst]

165. agree with everything you've written

Well done

[emmaverybo]

166. Aw shucks. Biden's clarification states that he is for expunging possession offenses records and

against prosecuting pot possession.

[quickesst]

167. Hmmm...

Imagine that.

[questionseverything]

174. but that won't change the law on public housing,student loans,dcfs and kids

people will still go to jail for growing a weed that helps their pain if they don't have the right paperwork

[emmaverybo]

178. No. But those issues can be addressed.

[nycbos]

155. Help help I'm being repressed.

[NurseJackie]

171. Oh, you...

[JudyM]

172. Rethug leadership starting with Gingrich has been a stream of vehement Never-Collaborators.

I don’t hear Joe addressing that significant problem.

This faith persists against all contrary evidence provided not only by the Trump era—in which the party has, among other things, abetted Trump’s attacks on Biden’s own son—but also by the Obama era, during which Biden saw, as his own recollection of the Garland saga illustrates, the GOP both frustrate Democrats with strategic intransigence and lean in to a conspiratorial racism that presaged Trump and will endure after his presidency.

The rethug world has changed, and has a nearly impenetrable shell. They openly despise us and need to fan that flame in order to get out their voters.

[BeckyDem]

179. Thank you, JudyM. The intentions of the GOP could not be more clear since Trump.

They are the thief in the night like never before, Mitch is Trump's ringleader for accomplishing more and more corruption by eliminating more governmental protections. That is the reality of our situation and with Trump gone that will not change.

[NBachers]

176. O, jesus- Nice headline, nice source link, nice try. No points, but, keep trying, Sunshine!

[EveHammond13]

177. I don't give a damn about any of this. We need to select who can win. Period.