Buttigeig 2020?

Written By: - Date published: 11:06 am, March 5th, 2020 - 33 comments
Categories: democracy under attack, elections, International, Politics, us politics - Tags: , ,

Yesterday I wrote a post around the serried opposition to Bernie Sanders. As noted in that post and in a few of the comments that followed, Biden is suffering from marked levels of mental degeneration. That’s not news to anyone who has been following the Democratic Party’s Primary process. It isn’t a smear. It’s a simple statement of fact.

I suggested that actors comprising the institutional opposition to Sanders would be happy to run Biden against Trump, all the while  knowing he would fail but secure in the knowledge that their interests would proceed for another four years.

That line of thought can be taken a step further.  Yes, they want Biden to win the Democratic Primary. And yes, they will indulge in all manner of fuckery to make that the case.

But why run a mentally unfit candidate who’s more or less guaranteed to lose in a general election, when you can have your hand picked man ready to step up to the task?

Let’s assume the Primary process spits up Biden as the Democratic Party nominee to run in the Presidential race. Biden will pick a VP. By the train of thought bing followed in this post, that VP will be Buttigieg.

At the appropriate moment after the convention when  “Uncle Joe” is retired because of that mental incapacity he’s lugging around, his chosen VP steps up to fill his shoes.

That’s the point where the people who brought us RussiaGate and who execute America’s never ending wars and crank America’s “coup treadmill” will have “their man” (The Spooks’ Choice) running for the White House.

And maybe that’s also the point when Elizabeth Warren gets the VP pick she thought she’d get in 2016 and thinks she’ll get in 2020?

A question then, for all the liberal enablers out there – what’s the “lesser of two evils” between a Buttigieg/Warren ticket and a Trump/Pence ticket? I can guess what the knee jerk reaction of most will be, but then I’m guessing that would come from having next to no knowledge on who and what Pete Buttigieg represents.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, the delegate count between Sanders and Biden is probably going to be evenly split after California’s count is known. So there’s still plenty of time left for Americans to save their representative democracy and derail liberalism before it pulls into its final stop somewhere high up by a castle.

 

 

33 comments on “Buttigeig 2020? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. adam 1
    5 March 2020 at 12:46 pm

    My question how does a guy with a very thin on the ground organisation, an equally light campaign structure, and a laughable outreach program get so big a bump?

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/26/us/politics/joe-biden-california-super-tuesday.html

    Nothing to see here, move along.

  2. Stunned Mullet 2
    5 March 2020 at 12:52 pm

    'Biden is suffering from marked levels of mental degeneration.'

    🙄

    Come on Bill this is really stretching the truth to create a conspiracy theory , Biden’s biggest failure on that front is he is far from a polished public speaker, but that hasn’t stopped many of the presidential candidates over the last few decades.

  3. Phil 3
    5 March 2020 at 12:58 pm

    This entire post would be hilarious if it just didn't make you look sad.

    • adam 3.1
      5 March 2020 at 2:02 pm

      Again, attacking the author – come phil put up a coherent argument at the very least…

      • Phil 3.1.1
        5 March 2020 at 4:50 pm

        *shrugs*

        When Bill comes back down to earth, we'll talk again. Until then he probably doesn't need your cheerleading, thanks.

        • adam 3.1.1.1
          5 March 2020 at 5:05 pm

          Oh so a web site designed for discussion you comment to shot the author or anyone who agrees with the basic thrust of the author.

          OK cool.

          • Bill 3.1.1.1.1
            5 March 2020 at 5:17 pm

            I'm "sad" and the post is almost "hilarious"…apparently.

            Until Phil makes a substantive comment or offers up some specifics to underscore or illustrate whatever he's trying to say (don't go holding your breath), it's "shrug and scroll, shrug and scroll". 😉

  4. Tiger Mountain 4
    5 March 2020 at 1:17 pm

    A thought experiment perhaps…otherwise, the <sarc> or “contains satire” may have been omitted.

    • Bill 4.1
      5 March 2020 at 5:22 pm

      It's a speculative post based on Biden's apparent degenerative mental capacity that "every someones dog" across the left is noting and commenting on. So yes, you can cast it as some sort of thought experiment (ie – "what if..then.").

      There's no satire though.

  5. AB 5
    5 March 2020 at 1:55 pm

    Looks like we'll get some of the most surreal and hilarious Presidential ‘debates’ of all time, e.g.

    TRUMP: "Ï was totally exonerated – it was a fake impeachment. They tried the Russia thing, then a fake impeachment. But we'll need to look at the Bidens, I think it needs a close look (sniff) a very close look because there are things there that are not good, not good. Burisma. B-U-R-I-S-M-A. We're having a close look at that (sniff) because of the corruption. It's a bad thing, very bad. There could be consequences, who knows, bad consequences because of the corruption. It looks that way (sniff) and its developing fast and I don't think it will be good for the Bidens (sniff) We''ll see – but we have a great economy right now, the best ever"

    BIDEN: We hold these truths to be self-immolating under God, bless our troops and you know the words – the other guy's in trouble I've been there got arrested and stood up for it, we're still alive and this is not America, what it should be no mallarkey, believe we can do it!

  6. te reo putake 6
    5 March 2020 at 2:12 pm

    "It's a simple statement of fact."

    Cool, lets see the evidence of that fact, then.

    No?

    So just another ageist smear against an older person still trying to make a difference after a lifetime of public service.

    The sad thing is that this attack line is exactly the same one that was used by Trump supporters against Hillary Clinton.

    Sad. So very fucken sad.

    • McFlock 6.1
      5 March 2020 at 2:49 pm

      I, for one, am stunned that HRC is still alive, given she was at death's door during 2016.

      • Stunned Mullet 6.1.1
        5 March 2020 at 3:12 pm

        She's long gone, replaced by a doppelganger apparently…I believe with the assistance of the reverse vampire consortium.

      • te reo putake 6.1.2
        5 March 2020 at 3:16 pm

        Yeah, a miracle recovery! It's almost like the attacks on HC were complete bullshit.

        • Phil 6.1.2.1
          5 March 2020 at 4:52 pm

          🙂

          30 years of sustained character assassination from Republicans must take some real toll on a lady's health, right?

    • Bill 6.2
      5 March 2020 at 3:27 pm

      Whatever I may or may not be guilty of, ageism ain't one of them. I couldn't give a flying fuck about what age people are, what gender a person is, what religion they follow, or what ethnicity they are.

      When we're talking politics, policy is where it begins and ends for me.

      If you want to observe Biden's confusion and multiple moments of him "tapping out" for yourself, then just view the many vids that a simple youtube search will bring up – and only view the ones from left wing sources if you've a problem with right wing ones.. Contrast and compare how he presents himself today with how he was able to present himself and his points of view from just a few years ago.

      • Stunned Mullet 6.2.1
        5 March 2020 at 3:40 pm

        I mistakenly read your comment as "fapping out" – needless to say keyboard is now inundated with my cup of tea.

      • McFlock 6.2.2
        5 March 2020 at 3:42 pm

        Biden's always been known for "gaffes" and general foot-in-mouth disease.

        Here's a hit collection compiled in 2014.

        Here's an article about his tendency towards saying the wrong thing (with examples) from 2008.

        He was never a Kennedy or an Obama.

        • Bill 6.2.2.1
          5 March 2020 at 3:55 pm

          Yup, he's known for making gaffes. And he has also struggled with a speech impediment.

          But those things are not the same as blanking out or confused ramblings.

          • McFlock 6.2.2.1.1
            5 March 2020 at 4:32 pm

            Yeah, they are.

            And he's not usually on the campaign trail with constant public appearances, so there might be at least a sample bias you're happily confusing with "marked levels of mental degeneration".

            • Bill 6.2.2.1.1.1
              5 March 2020 at 5:11 pm

              That's true enough – he's not usually on the campaign trail. That's been widely commented on. Even months ago, it was being noted by commentaters across the left that he was kept away from the public eye by his campaign team.

              I get there's such a thing as "sample bias", but I also get there are apples and oranges, aye?

              The premise for the speculation entered into in the post is that he is suffering from cognitive degeneration, and given that, what establishment actors might be contemplating should they manage to get him to the top of the nominee pile.

              You think he's all tickety boo? Then that's okay. It just means you disagree with the premise of the post. Noted.

              • McFlock …
                5 March 2020 at 5:34 pm

                OK, then there's the premise that he's "more or less guaranteed to lose".

                Big call.

                As for what mayor pete represents – I suggest at the very least he represents a better response to a pandemic than prayer and not reporting test numbers. Even if your wotifs based on dodgy assertions and diagnoses actually come to pass.

      • te reo putake 6.2.3
        5 March 2020 at 3:57 pm

        Bill, you wrote the post. It's ageist bullshit. You're the author, so Q.E.D.

        I'm pretty sure you're not a doctor and I'm 100% sure you're not Biden's doctor. You claim in the post that he shows " marked levels of mental degeneration" and is "mentally unfit". Where's the evidence?

        The simple truth is that you have no evidence at all, just a bullshit opinion, so all we are left with is a horrible, Trumpist smear.

    • Adrian Thornton 6.3
      5 March 2020 at 4:08 pm

      @ TRP Are you serious…really fucking serious, if you can't see with your own eyes and hear with your own ears that Biden is suffering from some sort of advanced age related cognitive degradation then I have you say your ability to read obvious human interaction is severely lacking. And no I am not going to provide any links, the net is flooded with them, because every time Biden appears in public he makes it quite clear that he is not right mentally…that is a simple statement of fact.

      In the early 2000's I spend years traveling up and down this country tracking down and interviewing old cycle racers ( aged between 65-95) many I found in rest homes..I meet and made friends with dozens over that time..I can tell you without doubt Biden is in serious trouble, why on earth do you think he has hardly been doing any campaigning, while running for POTUS for crying out loud?…but anyone but Bernie I guess.

  7. Bazza64 7
    5 March 2020 at 7:04 pm

    @TRP have you viewed any of the Biden gaffes ? Adrian put one up yesterday & it sounded like Biden was all over the place, he seemed to have totally lost it. Have a look & then you would have to agree there is a problem here. Ronald Reagan probably had some early dementia while he was president. He introduced Princess Dianna as “ Princess Diane , aaaaaaah Princess David”

    Reagen’s Star Wars strategic defence initiative was probably a dementia moment. But you had Nancy who solved US drug problems with her “Just say no” campaign.

    Reagen was supposed to have consulted an astrologer re important decisions, so anyone who believes that rubbish must be deluded or demented.

  8. DS 8
    6 March 2020 at 3:01 am

    There is actually no mechanism for removing (or replacing) a Presidential nominee after the Convention. If Biden were to fall under a bus after the Convention, his VP would de facto take over… in the sense that Electoral College Democrats would be instructed to vote for the VP (and for his/her intended VP). It gets seriously messy.

    (See the 1872 election for an illustration).

    • Phil 8.1
      9 March 2020 at 10:22 am

      Yeah, there's no Constitutional mechanism because the Constitution doesn't really contemplate political parties at all.

      The Democratic party is a private institution and will presumably have its own founding constitution (in the same sense that a corporate legal entity has a constitution establishing its internal rules) that might discuss this type of succession?

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.