Don't Underestimate The Republicans. Joe Biden Can Beat Them.

[ginchinchili]

Notice that Bush hasn't been impeached. Look how much Bush has gotten away with. Clinton was investigated and impeached over a blowjob. The political landscape is not that much different today than it was in 2004, especially where the fear factor is concerned. Iraq will help the Democrats, but it ain't no slam dunk. That's why it's imperative that the Democratic candidate takes the Republicans head on on the issue of national security. They also have to start going after the Party and not just the candidate. The Republicans have been doing this for years now to the Democrats and the Democrats have been paying a big price.

Underestimating the Republicans is akin to handing them the election. They will not go gentle into that good night. They will make the argument that whatever your feeling about the invasion, we are there and have responsibilities to ourselves, the Iraqis, Israel,and the region, and that staying there in a reduced role will keep us safer.

There is an article that came out today which has highlights from several interviews with people concerning the war. Most everybody is resigned to the idea that we'll be stuck there for years to come. The Republican will reduce our numbers and shift our roles, and argue that anything else will make the US look like weak cowards running from our responsibilities, will allow Iran--who is working on a nuclear weapon--to act as the de facto government of Iraq, will allow al Qaeda to set up training camps, etc., and would invite ethnic cleansing on the part of the Shiites on the Kurds. They will argue that the Democrats plan will see to it that our soldiers have died in vain. Count on it. Please. The Democrat has to convince the country that we can make a gradual pullout and then offer a plan that will convince us will make us safer by pulling out. It all depends on who is making these arguments, how effective they are in making these arguments, and the details of their arguments.

The country is not ready to entrust a military conflict to a woman, especially not the hated Hillary Clinton. Let me be clear, I don't feel this about Hillary, but I'm a little better informed than the average American voter (I'm afraid it doesn't take much), but it's a fact that she won't be able to get around, no matter how much money she spends. When people go into that voting booth, it will just be too hard for too many Americans to pull the lever for Hillary Clinton. Giuliani becomes our next president.

I'm supporting Sen. Biden because I believe he can convince the greatest number of Americans that pulling out of Iraq is the best thing to do, but there really will be some bad consequences. He's honest like that. We need honesty. We're longing for it. He will make the argument that in the balance, he can withdraw our troops and still make us safer. He can go toe to toe with Giuliani. Biden's a smart guy who is also tough, passionate, and compassionate. He's got the foreign policy experience and knows this war as well as anyone. He can explain things in a way that allows the average person on the street to understand what's going on. He has the personality that can appeal to the independents and disillusioned Republican moderates.

Americans don't like this war. They want out, but they're uncomfortable about just pulling out. Biden has a plan that enough people can be satisfied with. Biden is the Democrats best shot at beating the Republican nominee. He's tougher than Giuliani and more likable than the actor. This one is for keeps, folks. We'd better play it smart.

[napi21]

1. I've pretty much decided that I'm going to vote for Biden in the Ga.

primary. There are quite a few like me here too. It doesn't make me optomistic that Ga. will EVER vote for a Dem in the majority, but I've listened carefully to all the candidates, and Joe is the least "politically correct" candidate out there...in either party! He's very smart, always uses common sense, is experienced on all the issues, and I trust him to put qualified people into the power positions. Yes, I know he voted for the bankruptcy bill, but I think we can change the fundimental flaw in that, which is to exclude unforseen medical expenses.

One by on, I've eliminated the others for one reason or another, and Joe is still at the top of my list!

[ginchinchili]

4. My thought process was pretty much the same.

I've always like Joe Biden, but didn't give him much serious consideration at first. Then I heard a moderately conservative pundit (I forget his name but they have him on NPR a lot) talking about Biden and saying what a shame more attention isn't being given to this guy just because he doesn't always have a panel of speech writer screen everything he speaks, and that Washington needs more Democrats and Republicans like him. I thought about that and started giving the guy more serious consideration. Like you, I reached the conclusion that this guy is the most qualified to be the president we most need right now. And he can win! Democrats just have to open their eyes, because I'm convinced that Hillary can't win. Joe Biden is tough and smart, and has good ideas. I think he'd be an excellent 2 term president.

[gateley]

13. You're so right - "the least politically correct". What a breath of fresh air. nt

[PatSeg]

22. I never was into politics until the last six years

I voted for Clinton, Gore, and Kerry and sincerely believed they were good choices, BUT I never got involved with any of them. The first bumper sticker I ever put on my car was Kerry/Edward, but that was about it.

I have never donated to a political candidate before Biden either. The reason I am so passionate about THIS primary is because Joe Biden connected with me better than any Democratic candidate in the past 20 years, not just the current lineup.

[ginchinchili]

33. You're pretty astute, if you ask me, tsegat01

I really think this guy is what this country need now. He's strong, smart, and experienced. And he is moderate enough to win over Independents and moderate Republicans. And he knows how to get things done and work across the isle which, like it or not, is absolutely necessary. Kudos to you, tsegat01. Me thinks you have good political instincts.

[saltpoint]

37. I second that. "Good political instincts" is a dead-on bullseye.

[saltpoint]

2. So far on DU I don't hear any calls for complacency.

Re Biden: he's a damn good man.

[ginchinchili]

6. I think a call for complacency would sound pretty foolish, don't you?

No one calls for complacency. That's not how complacency rears its subtle head. But I've read several posts, perhaps some you've written, that go on about how much the Democrats are going to clean the clocks of the Republicans and that no one in their right mind would vote republican, or something to that effect. I'm just trying to remind Democrats that this election will be extremely difficult, but that we can win. Over-confidence is a weakness and we can't afford weakness. Confidence is good. Over-confidence is bad. This election won't be easy. Assume that. The swiftboat attack ads worked and I understand that the same group is already planning another attack campaign against whomever the Democrats choose. Rest assured they're hoping it's Hillary. It will be Whitewater/missing files/Monica redux. We have to be prepared. That's all I'm saying. Assume the worst and we'll be best prepared.

[saltpoint]

7. You betcha. You can't go 24 hours on DU without reading a post by

me and others about defeating Republicans.

Quite frankly it's obsessional.

The doctors are doing all they can.

[jillan]

3. My fav new line from BIden - "It's Bush's war, but America's problem"

He hit the hammer on the nail.

Biden will stand firm - he is not going to let the RW walk all over him.
and I believe that he is going to be the hardest one for them to attack.

Infact, he is starting to make them nervous, because the first attack to him was
just delivered. They had to go back *20 years* to the plagerism smear campaign against him
to find something they could attack him on.

Tomorrow on Chris Wallace will be a great preview of how Biden will handle their attack machine.

[ginchinchili]

10. You've got it exactly right

You wrote, "...and I believe that he is going to be the hardest one for them to attack" which is why Joe Biden would be Karl Rove's worst nightmare. Their main attack on Biden will be to go through his senate record and pull things out of context and make him look foolish. There are times when that could work. But in today's political climate, I don't think that will have a lot of effect. Americans are worried and want someone strong. Biden is a strong moderate Democrat with good ideas and a gruff appeal that will win over independents and moderate Republicans. The attacks on his record won't work. Biden can convince Americans that he will do a better job of shoring up our nation's security while repairing our damaged relationships across the world and giving us a responsible way out of Iraq than Giuliani or any other Republican. A vote for Joe Biden simply makes the most sense.

[Captain Hilts]

5. A year ago I thought of him as MBNA's whore. Now, he's sayin' something to me. nt

[gateley]

8. K&R nt

[Honeycombe8]

9. I like Biden. I think he'd make a great President. But he doesn't have a prayer of winning.

He has that plaguerism scandal in his past. He was by his own admission guilty, I believe. That excludes him automatically, I'm sorry to say, in this climate of unethical behavior.

Second...he grates on people's nerves. Talks too much. Uses big words. Sounds like one of them 'thar elitists (so to speak).

Even if everyone who supports or likes biden were to vote for him< even then he wouldn"t have enough votes to win>

[saltpoint]

11. I like John Kennedy. I think he'd make a great president. But he doesn't have

a prayer of winning. His old man ran booze and that's a matter of record, which excludes him from nomination consideration automatically, I'm sorry to say, in the post-War prosperity era.

Plus, he grates on people's nerves. Too wordy. All that intellectual blah-blah-blah. Kind of a northeast liberal elitist-type, if you know what I mean.

As well, I don't think he has much support across the country. Wouldn't have enough votes to win nomination even if those who did like him voted for him.

I'd definitely write Kennedy off for this nomination race, yessirr.

[ginchinchili]

12. TOUCHE'

[Honeycombe8]

26. Kennedy was the Dems' 1st Choice. Kennedy was never 1% in Dem support like Biden.

Kennedy was the #1 pick of the Af. American community.

Kennedy was the #1 pick of the available Democrats to run. That's what we're talking about here, right? The available candidates to nominate. Of the available candidates...Kennedy was first choice. Biden is at the bottom of the choices, in his own party.

Keep supporting Biden if you want...but it is a fact, not opinion, that if EVERYONE WHO SUPPORTS BIDEN were to actually vote for him, he'd lose both the nomination and the general election.

[saltpoint]

35. You don't have to accept my analogy if you don't want to.

I'm not going to come over to your house and harrangue you about it.

But you missed several key points.

[jillan]

15. Congratulations!

You have just used the repugliecan talking points against Biden.

[napi21]

17. That's BS and you know it! In 2004 you could have, and probably did

say the same damn thing about Kerry! I can tell by the way you write that you are a pessimist, and will find every possible reason NOT to vote for any candidate being talked about!

Joe's plaguerism charge may have been true, but it was obviously an oversight. If you can say you have Never made any mistakes, feel free to slam him!

[Honeycombe8]

27. No, I didn't. Kerry was in the first tier of nomination choices. Biden now is like...

Al Sharpton then, in terms of degree of support among the Democrats.

Did you predict that Sharpton would win in '04?

[saltpoint]

36. Kerry's campaign at this time in 04 was left for dead by insiders and pundits both.

Joe Lieberman was outpolling him by a wide margin, in fact.

Kerry's surge in Iowa was a late rise and represented a very dramatic shift in the polling there. Ask Dick Gephardt in August and Septgember how thigns look for a second victory in Iowa. Now ask him again in early January. Finally, ask him what time his withdrawal statement is -- before or immediately after the end of the caucuses that very evening.

Kerry, like Joe Biden, was Catholic, a formidable voice on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, a senator of long standing popular with constitutents, and not least, capable if not gifted outright at using language distilled to its essence to communicate to voters.

Gephardt and Lieberman, the early fall leaders in Iowa, did not stay the late fall leaders. Gephardt was buried alive with 11% and Lieberman didn't even bother to show up.

[Honeycombe8]

49. Kerry had had good numbers before he dipped. Gephardt was never going to win...

he'd never had really good numbers. He was popular in a couple of union states, but that's all. (He is similar to Edwards right now.)

Kerry had dipped very low, but HAD been much higher, and had accumulated some healthy donations. None of that is like Biden is. Kerry then is similar to McCain now.

Biden is much in the same position as Al Sharpton was then, and in a similar position now as Kucinich. He had a small, core following, but never accumulated much money or a national following.

Hey, I wish it were different. I think Biden would make an outstanding President. I'd vote for him in a Delaware minute. But I think the best we can hope for is Secretary of State Biden...and whoever wins in '08, if its a Democrat, they would be foolish not to make Biden the Sec. of State.

[saltpoint]

50. Dean and Gephardt owned December in Iowa.

Gephardt never going to win? You are mistaken. He'd already won Iowa before. He was well-known there and then some. Tall, freckled, affable, good common touch, not too snotty, no whiff of the power elite to him at all, great on rural issues, handsome family, strong labor ties, close neighbor.

Dean eventually overtook him but Gephardt led in the deep parts of that fall.

And then Kerry and Edwards took the lead from both.

But Kerry and Edwards surged very late in the game.

I'm not getting your Sharpton/Kerry Sharpton/Biden connection at all. No sale.

[Debi]

19. Please do some background checking on that plagiarism scandal

like finding the part where the staffer from another campaign created the media frenzy and later apologized for it.

Maybe he won't win, but it's not going to be because he failed to credit the author of a quote in one speech, even though he'd given that credit in the same stump speech over and over and over again, twenty years ago.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/frenzy/biden.htm Biden is not perfect - and has made mistakes in his life. However, I don't believe there is a single candidate on either side that is without baggage and bad experiences.

[PatSeg]

20. And from a Democratic campaign at that

[Honeycombe8]

28. I read an article stating that Biden admitted the whole speech was stolen...

he hadn't had time to write his own speech. He apologized.

It was not an article by the right wing or by Fox.

[Debi]

31. Please provide that article - I doubt you'll be able to. n/t

[PatSeg]

21. There are other Democratic candidates

who grate on my nerves, but I still think they would be good presidents, I just wouldn't want to listen to them several times a week for 4 or 8 years.

Actually Biden's negatives are pretty minor compared to some. Right now he is not getting the coverage or the $$ he needs. I think that is beginning to change, at least the coverage part. Hopefully the $$ will follow.

[Honeycombe8]

29. The poll facts....sadly...Clinton 45% Obama 24% Edwards 16% Biden "nominal"....

The latest (9/13/07) Gallup national poll:

Clinton 45%
Obama about 24%
Edwards 16%
Richardson - nominal
Biden - nominal
Kucinich - nominal


In Iowa, the latest poll shows approx:
Clinton
Obama
Edwards
as the top three favorites.

Following a very distant fourth is Richardson.

Kucinich and Biden are equal at about 2 - 5 %, depending on the different questions. But the top three contenders remain the same in the various polls.

These are the cold, hard facts. People can spit in the wind if they want, but Biden will never become the Dem. nominee, any more than Kucinich will. Richardson - that at least is an outside chance (although a miniscule chance). But to argue that the others at the bottom have even a measurable chance is to be denying reality.

Geez....as a Clark supporter for '04 (and a campaign contributor), even I could see the writing on the wall after his first couple of debates, and his lack of experience at campaigning. A fine person who would've made an excellent President. But that only counts IF YOU CAN FIRST WIN THE NOMINATION AND THEN WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION. To do that, you have to have a lot of popular support, a lot of money, experience at politicking and campaigning. Biden has the last criteria, but not the first two.

[Debi]

39. In August of 2003 the polls showd Lieberman/Gephardt/Dean

With Kerry polling at 5% along with Al Sharpton. :shrug:

[KT2000]

14. I will be supporting Biden

for that very reason.
He is very appealing to the mainstream voter and could win the election.

[ginchinchili]

16. Biden WILL win the election

If we can just get enough Democrats thinking logically and taking the election into their own hands.

[seasat]

18. I'll bite, how is Biden's position on Immigration different from Richardson?

Or any of the other candidates for that matter?

Richardson has a prominent link on his website that details his stand. He's an expert in the area, having served as OAS special ambassador on immigration. I had to search around for Biden's views and the only real difference I found was Biden's support for the border fence. He said his support was to slow down drug trafficking and not for illegal immigration purposes. Here's the OnTheIssues.org list on Biden and immigration.

* It's impractical to deport 14 million illegal immigrants. (Jun 2007)
* Voted for border fence, but to tackle drug trafficking. (Jun 2007)
* Voted YES on comprehensive immigration reform. (Jun 2007)
* Voted NO on declaring English as the official language of the US government. (Jun 2007)
* Voted YES on eliminating the "Y" nonimmigrant guestworker program. (May 2007)
* Voted YES on building a fence along the Mexican border. (Sep 2006)
* Voted YES on establishing a Guest Worker program. (May 2006)
* Voted YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security. (May 2006)
* Voted YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship. (May 2006)
* Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 1998)
* Voted NO on visas for skilled workers. (May 1998)
* Voted NO on limit welfare for immigrants. (Jun 1997)

Heck, Biden looks liberal on the issue and better to me after reading that list.

[jillan]

25. From Biden today on the campaign trail

Senator Biden says his Republican opponents, who say all illegal immigrants should be deported, want the impossible.

His solution is tougher penalties for those who hire illegal immigrants. Biden also wants to give employers the resources they need to find out if an employee is a legal citizen in the first place.

http://www.ktiv.com/News/index.php?ID=16986

Don't know if that helps.

[seasat]

30. Richardson, Clinton, Obama, and Edwards have all made the same statements too.

• Richardson: We must crack down on employers who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants and enforce the laws already on the books.
  
• Edwards: We also need to crack down on employers that hire undocumented immigrants.
  
• Obama: We have to make sure that employers are held accountable, because right now employers are taking advantage of undocumented workers.
  
• Clinton: I'm in favor of comprehensive immigration reform, which includes tightening our border security, sanctioning employers to employ undocumented immigrants, getting the 12 million or so immigrants out of the shadows.

Their statements on identification of immigrant workers are also similar.

The OP in a post in this thread and his OP in another thread made the claim that Richardson was too liberal on immigration. That is a Repug talking point that Richardson has said that he expected to be used against him since he is a border governor. While unsaid by Richardson, the Repugs will also attack him on it because he is Hispanic. That is why he has already laid out a moderate detailed immigration policy. Plus it's an issue that will appeal to Hispanics and Richardson is hoping to make some gains with them in some of the early states.

I'm not attacking Biden on his immigration policy. His votes on it are exactly the same as Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. Dodd is probably also similar but I haven't checked his record on it yet. The OP has stated that Richardson is more liberal than Biden on immigration policy. The only difference I can find is that Richardson opposed the border wall that all the current senators voted for.

Other than that one issue, they're pretty much the same on immigration policy. They all want a system of employee verification for employers with tougher penalties on those that hire illegal immigrants. They all want increased border security. They all want a guest worker program that is fair to the worker but doesn't effect US worker's wages or employment. They all want a path to citizenship for the undocumented workers already here.

[Truth2Tell]

23. Biden is busy

doing the TeeVee interview circuit to denounce the war - finally.

But every time he finishes with his day late and dollar short war criticisms, he reminds all of us how unfortunate it is that nothing can be done by the Senate to stop the madness - sixty seven votes to override a veto and all that.

The only problem with this second talking point of his is that it's a complete and total lie.

Biden is a lying asswipe and a career apologist for American imperial aggression. That's why he's stuck at 1% for life.

[PatSeg]

24. I'd respond to your post

except for the fact you called him a "lying asswipe".

[Truth2Tell]

32. Is he a friend of yours?

Or do you simply object to any foul language?

[Debi]

40. Friend or not - none of our candidates need to be disparaged by

being called filthy names.

[PatSeg]

42. I don't object to foul language

I DO object to it being used against a Democratic candidate, as does DU. It is against the rules and it does not promote intelligent debate.

[ginchinchili]

34. You're a troll and should be ignored

Go back to your rightwing sandbox and rebury your head.

[Truth2Tell]

41. Maybe I'm just good and pissed off

at the complicity of so many of my fellow Democrats in the bloodthirsty policies of this administration. Biden is a good ole boy defender of the long time status quo in American foreign policy. He's a serial enabler.

I'd have a lot more respect for Biden and his ilk if they simply said, "hey, we just don't want to pay what we fear will be the political price for ending the war, so we're gonna keep funding it." But when they lie to me and claim they can't do anything about it, then all bets are off. I'll call him and his cohorts whatever I like.

A D in front of your name is no free pass here. And if there are any trolls around here, they’re the ones trying to cheerlead a DINO on a progressive message board.

[ginchinchili]

45. Ok, good and pissed off. Here's the deal...

Though I'm leery of your real intentions here, due to the energy and vitriol in your attacks (not to mention the avatar on your posts), I'll play along and assume you're not a neo-con troll.

We are currently engaged in a presidential election, the primary to be precise. We will have had 8 years of a president who has done tremendous harm to our country in practically every aspect imaginable. If we, the Democrats, don't choose a candidate who can beat (probably) Giuliani, then we will have at least, AT LEAST, 4 more years of Republican mis-leadership. I agree with your ostensible concerns, our system needs an overhaul, but helping Giuliani by spending energy beating up on the Democratic nominees will only take you further, not closer, to your goal. Right now there are young Americans, and innocent Iraqis, who are being ruthlessly murdered daily due to George W. Bush. Perhaps, just perhaps, your priorities at this point in time are a bit askew. Please think about it, assuming you're not a neo-con troll.

[Truth2Tell]

46. But I don't think

running to the right will win us the Presidency. I don't think Biden is the only Dem who can win.

I don't think the Democrats need to out "tough guy" the Repugs. The American people are well past that. Giuliani couldn't beat any of the Democrats in this race, IMO, with the possible exception of Mike Gravel (who is nevertheless 100x the man Giuliani is).

It's the same political fear - that fear of being seen as soft on our enemies or unpatriotic - that keeps Biden from doing the things he could do to end this war - and also keeps Democrats from supporting candidates who talk about real political changes and strength through peace.

We need to stop being afraid of the Rovian message to the point that we repeat it. You can't beat them by trying to be as much like them as possible. Be something new and crush them.

[ginchinchili]

47. It's true that you can't beat them by trying to be as much like them as possible...

you beat them by understanding their game and being better at it than them. You have to out play them and you can do that within the context of what Democratic voters want.

For example, most Americans want out of Iraq. This works in favor of the Democrats and is a liability for the Republicans. However, most Americans are uncomfortable with just pulling all of our troops out at once and letting whatever happens happen. Biden's plan not only satisfies the preferences of most Americans, it also can give our military a chance to leave without feeling like it was all just a big waste of time and also give the Iraqi's a final chance, a chance with a real deadline, to make some organizational arrangements while we're still there. It will also allow us to be better able to shore up stability in the region before we're gone. It's a responsible plan. It's responsible to the American public, it's responsible to our military, and it's responsible to the Iraqis, as responsible as any plan can be at this point. It's not the "feel good" plan, it's the right plan.

[Truth2Tell]

48. OK

The Biden plan (or the Leslie Gelb plan, depending upon who's taking credit) may be the best short term option for getting us out of the mess we've managed to get ourselves into with our hubris. But really, some version of a partition and a phased withdrawal is clearly inevitable to anyone who makes a clear-eyed assessment of the realities in Iraq. I don't give Biden as much credit for seeing reality as some seem to want to give him. After all, the devil is in the details.

And, more importantly, the devil is also in the foreign policy outlook beyond Iraq.

Let's not forget that Biden helped us into this grand mess. Before I'd be prepared to cheer his new found war criticism, I'd want to hear a few other things from him that I don't think I'm ever likely to hear. For example:

Is Joe Biden prepared to acknowledge that this war was a crime against international law? And will he further acknowledge that the United States has no business invading, attacking or occupying, or threatening to invade, attack or occupy other sovereign states as a tool of foreign policy?

Will Joe Biden admit that our current geo-strategic posture is deeply flawed and that Iraq is simply a symptom of that? Will he talk about how a strategy designed to allow America to maintain the ability to make massive military strikes at any point on the globe is actually making us less safe?

Will Joe Biden talk about how our run-away military industrial complex is bankrupting America both financially and morally? Will he talk about reducing our global military posture from bases in 50+ nations, to an affordable and sensible strategic position emphasizing self-defense and smaller budgets instead?

Will Joe Biden work to reduce the shrill nationalism that defines so much of the discourse on foreign policy in America? Will he denounce rhetoric that falsely paints America as some kind of universal savior or guarantor of democracy? Will he embrace the language of modesty and humility, and now repentance, in our future dealings with the rest of the world? Will he declare America to be an equal among a family of nations on Earth, rather than falsely insist that we are a "superpower?"

Will Joe Biden address the fact that American diplomatic and military power has been grossly misused over the last 50 years, by American governments, lately under his supervision, to further the agendas of corporate looters, third world dictators and glaringly corrupt oligarchies both at home and abroad?

Joe Biden would need to speak very loudly and clearly about the above issues before I could forgive him his role in our present morass and the larger related national decline.

So even though his Iraq disengagement plan, while flawed, may center on some self-evident truths, he doesn't seem to have learned the lessons of the bigger picture. The problem for Biden is that more and more Americans are learning these lessons - they are absorbing Iraq as the object lesson in imperial hubris that it actually is. I think I'll save my vote for a candidate who gets where we're headed in this regard.

[saltpoint]

38. What a coarse assessment of a liberal public servant.

We're just going to have to send you to bed without dessert. No Rice Krispie treats for you!

[Truth2Tell]

43. Biden - sometimes liberal and often not.

Me - coarse, sometimes yes. Uncivil to Biden, sure. Uncivil to anyone on this board? Not meant to be.

[saltpoint]

44. You still get ZERO Rice Krispie treats.

Nasty tongued little rapscallion.