What would President Biden do?

59 comments on “What would President Biden do? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Gareth 1

   4 May 2020 at 8:41 am

   They should really stop putting that poor confused old man up in front of cameras and make whoever is writing the teleprompter scripts stand in front of them instead.

   I don't have any problems with the policies, but when your guy can't get through a one on one meeting with someone who's only there to endorse him and tell him how great he is, without reading the whole thing from a teleprompter and who, when the teleprompter scrolls to the end, just sits there staring blankly at the camera until his wife pulls him away, it's just sad.

   His VP pick will be the most important decision his team ever makes for him.
   • Phil 1.1

     4 May 2020 at 11:04 am

     This is a post about Biden, not Trump.
     • Gareth 1.1.1

       4 May 2020 at 2:57 pm

       And my comment addressed the post.

       As terrible as Trump is, no one can accuse him of having nothing to say when the teleprompter stops.

       Biden clearly has "cognitive decline" as seems to be the polite phrase. I've watched him live, and it's an embarrassment that his handlers are pretending everything's fine. Some of the reactions from people on the calls with him would have been hilarious if it weren't so cringe-inducing.
       • Dukeofurl 1.1.1.1

         4 May 2020 at 6:15 pm

         “Are Joe Biden's gaffes related to a lifelong stuttering problem?

         The Democratic presidential candidate’s gaffes may be rooted in a little-understood disability”

         https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/accessibility/471707-how-joe-bidens-gaffes-have-affected-his-campaign-and

         This may provide some answers for you Gareth, thats if you were looking.
         • Gareth 1.1.1.1.1

           4 May 2020 at 7:00 pm

           If it was just gaffes when there were other areas where he was clearly mentally competent, then sure.

           But it's not being able to speak off the cuff, even for simple "Thanks for your support" calls and long pauses where his teleprompter has stopped and he just doesn't know what to say. Have you seen him speak without a teleprompter once since the debates? It's forgetting the interviewer's name and calling them some other name instead. It's calling Angela Merkel Margaret Thatcher and calling Xi JinPing Den Xiaoping. It's saying he's running for the Senate. It's the weird insults to people who have come to his rally. Seriously, what the hell is a "lying dog-faced pony soldier" and why would you call a woman that?

           Go back and watch videos of Biden from 2012. He speaks without notes, much faster and more confidently. He still misspeaks, but you can clearly understand what he's trying to say. Now he fumbles and shuffles his notes and is lost unless the words are held in front of his face. It's sad that it has to play out on TV for everyone to watch.
           • Dukeofurl 1.1.1.1.1.1

             5 May 2020 at 8:29 am

             In addition to periodically stuttering or blocking on certain sounds, he appears to intentionally not stutter by switching to an alternative word—a technique called “circumlocution”—­which can yield mangled syntax. I’ve been following practically everything he’s said for months now, and sometimes what is quickly characterized as a memory lapse is indeed a stutter. As Eric Jackson, the speech pathologist, pointed out to me, during a town hall in August Biden briefly blocked on Obama, before quickly subbing in my boss. The headlines after the event? “Biden Forgets Obama’s Name.”

             The details are covered more in The Atlantic story which the previous link was based on.

             Forgetting Merkels name was likely because as a non english work the pronunciation caught him out, as a VP for 8 years he would know who she was.
   • kiwi 1.2

     5 May 2020 at 1:18 pm

     hilary for vp then poor old pedophile joe will likely suffer

     a heart attack
2. Morrissey 2

   4 May 2020 at 8:51 am

   poor confused old man … just sits there staring blankly at the camera until his wife pulls him away…

   Reagan redux.
3. te reo putake 3

   4 May 2020 at 8:55 am

   Fantastic post, Advantage! It's great to to read a clear and concise summary of Biden's program. Ok, there's nothing we'd consider revolutionary in there, but the USA is more of an evolutionary system anyway.

   It's also going to be hard work getting these policies over the line, however, the balance of power in the House and Senate is likely to head left in November. All House of Rep's seats are up for the vote, and 35 of the 100 Senate seats.

   If Biden is elected, it'll make a huge difference, even if little of this program eventually comes to pass. Just having a rational, predictable leader is going to be a huge help as the USA rebuilds its economy (and possibly slips to 2nd place in world GDP's behind China some time during the next Presidential term).
   • Morrissey 3.1

     4 May 2020 at 9:03 am

     … a rational, predictable leader…

     Well, at least he's predictable.

     “I was one of the architects of Plan Colombia,” Biden boasted in a July 5 interview with CNN, referring to the multi-billion dollar U.S. effort to end Colombia’s civil war with a massive surge of support for the country’s military. According to Biden, the plan was a panacea for Colombia’s problems, from “crooked cops” to civil strife.

     But Biden’s plan for Colombia has contributed directly to the country’s transformation into a hyper-militarized bastion of right-wing rule, enhancing the power and presence of the notoriously brutal armed forces while failing miserably in its anti-narcotic and reformist objectives.

     This year alone, more than 50 human rights defenders were killed in Colombia in the first four months of 2019, while coca production is close to record levels. And as Colombian peace activists lamented in interviews with The Grayzone, the U.S. is still in complete control of Bogotá’s failed anti-drug policy, thanks largely to Plan Colombia.

     Biden has also pumped up his role in an initiative called the Alliance for Prosperity, which was applied to the Northern Triangle of Central America. The former vice president was so central to the program’s genesis that it was informally known as “Plan Biden.”

     https://consortiumnews.com/2019/07/31/how-joe-biden-fueled-the-latin-american-migration-crisis/
   • Ad 3.2

     5 May 2020 at 1:12 pm

     There's just a smidgen of a chance that they pick up Maine and Arizona and come back to even in the Senate, with a Democratic Vice President making the deciding vote that tilts to a Democratic majority across all three layers of Federal government.

     Then we would start to see some policy deals done.
     • Andre 3.2.1

       5 May 2020 at 2:26 pm

       It's currently 47-53 in the Senate. So the Dems need at least two more beyond Maine and Arizona, given that Doug Jones is very unlikely to keep Alabama.

       Fortunately Colorado is very likely for the Dems, especially with Hickenlooper choosing to go for it. Steve Bullock jumping into the race in Montana at least gives them a decent shot at a Dem pickup. North Carolina is definitely a tossup. Iowa, Kansas, Georgia and Texas look like they might be within a good reach.
4. Morrissey 4

   4 May 2020 at 8:55 am

   Mandatory Minimum Sentences: eliminate them. Private prisons: eliminate them.

   Biden is one of the culprits for both of those plagues. Nobody in the U.S. would believe a word of what he says on either issue.
   • Adrian Thornton 4.1

     4 May 2020 at 3:29 pm

     These guys believe what they are told..shit they even think Biden is lucid because they have been told he is, despite what they can plainly see an hear with their own eyes and ears…it is all very (and I hate to use this term) ..Orwellian.
5. Wayne 5

   4 May 2020 at 9:05 am

   I presumed the item was about how Biden would have handled the current crisis, not about his general platform of policy.

   So what would have been different. I think Joe would have been more disciplined and more reassuring. So these are my most important differences. The first and most important would have have been no mixed messages. The public would have known the rules and would not be encouraged to flout them. The second would have been more generous wage subsidies. The third would have been a more collaborative approach with the Governors. And the fourth would not be trying to deflect blame on everyone else, including China.

   Would that have resulted in fewer deaths? Probably not, or at the most, only on the margins. Not much of what has happened in New York, for instance can be pinned at the door of Trump, not in the sense there would have been fewer deaths.

   However the US would have seemed more of of a Leader in the global fight against the virus.
   • McFlock 5.1

     4 May 2020 at 9:40 am

     The distribution of ppe would probably have been more efficient and effective. That would have saved lives.

     Flipside is the maga crowd could be taking shots at police.
   • Macro 5.2

     4 May 2020 at 12:02 pm

     Would that have resulted in fewer deaths? Probably not, or at the most, only on the margins.

     Such an analysis completely ignores all the previous stupid cost-cutting actions that Trump has overseen in the past 3 and 1/2 years of his administration. A short overview of the matter can be seen here:

     Pandemic brings Trump's war on science to the boil

     Three years of hostility to evidence-based policy have led to a crisis in which the president’s ill-informed, self-serving ‘hunches’ have deadly consequences

     The accusation that in three short years Trump has succeeded in severing historic ties between the US government and science-based decision making is one of the more chilling charges leveled at his presidency. Science has after all been at the core of the American experiment, ever since Franklin Roosevelt created the White House Office of Scientific R&D in 1941.

     In his first set of presidential appointments, Obama brought into his administration five science Nobel prizewinners and 25 members of the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine. They became known as the “dream team”.

     By contrast, Holdren said, “Trump is the exact opposite. Science has played no role in virtually all the top appointments he has made.”

     The roll call of officials Trump has entrusted with protecting Americans from Covid-19 tells its own story. With no Nobel laureates in sight, Trump relied initially on Alex Azar, secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), who is a lawyer and former drug company boss; followed by Mike Pence, a career politician and evangelical Christian; and most recently Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, whose expertise lies in real estate.

     Trump’s top team have in turn promoted individuals in their own mold. As Reuters has reported, Azar gave the job of coordinating the fight against coronavirus within HHS, to an individual whose job immediately before joining the Trump administration was as a dog breeder running a small business called Dallas Labradoodles.

     my bold

     In Trump Republicans have found a leader who regards his own innate abilities to divine the truth as superior to evidence-based science. In one of the most telling moments of his daily White House coronavirus briefings, Trump was asked what metrics he would use to decide when Americans could emerge from lockdown.

     He raised his right hand, placed his index finger against his temple, and said: “The metrics right here. That’s my metrics.”

     All the major mistakes that have been made by the Trump administration in handling the pandemic can be ascribed to this failure to listen to, and trust, scientific advice. Trump was slow to mobilise the federal government because he failed to heed scientific warnings; instead he chose to follow his “hunch” that a “miracle” would happen and the virus would disappear.

     https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/03/science-donald-trump-coronavirus

     There is a lot more that can be said on this matter. His canning of the pandemic unit in 2019, the sidelining of the CDC in favour of his "team of 'experts'". His complete disregard for the seriousness of the situation for almost 3 months, He is still unconcerned with the safety of his fellow Americans – his only concern at present is the possibility of his success at the polls in November. The disaster of closing the borders at 48 hours notice, and forcing thousands to be herded into airports for hours on end waiting to be processed though border control. That in itself is the primary source of infection in the state of New York. That is just a short list highlighting some of the features that are the tip of the iceberg of the Trump administrations failure in its duty to protect Americans.
     • Anne 5.2.1

       4 May 2020 at 4:45 pm

       In other words, Trump banned all forms of science – including Climate Change.

       One of the first things Trump did was to close the 'pandemic unit' Obama had been advised to set up in his last term of office, then turned around in just the last couple of weeks and blamed Obama for there being no pandemic unit.
   • Tricledrown 5.3

     4 May 2020 at 10:06 pm

     Wayne you don't know.Trumps lack of leadership at the early stages especially has cost 10's of thousands of lives then his sabotaging of efforts to contain the out breaks 10's of thousands.The Toll will be closer to 200,000 deaths without the 2nd wave which will happen in the US.
6. Nic the NZer 6

   4 May 2020 at 9:06 am

   It was my understanding that Trump had failed to pass any health care reforms under his presidency and the US was still essentially operating on Obama care era legislation. Is this incorrect?
   • Ad 6.1

     4 May 2020 at 9:18 am

     Here's the cuts and changes Trump's administration made to Obamacare through to October 2019.

     https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/10/14/768731628/trump-is-trying-hard-to-thwart-obamacare-hows-that-going

     I can have a little search for further changes made since then, but it gives you an idea.
7. Tiger Mountain 7

   4 May 2020 at 9:57 am

   Centrists posting on The Standard might get away with toadying up to the likes of Mr Biden by employing that favoured cloaking device–“lesser evil” voting–but as some activists in the US say “Biden can have my vote but not my soul” (or genuine support).

   Thus, the two party dictatorship Americans enjoy is designed to ensure it is never quite “the right time”–Senate and House majorities notwithstanding, for radical change, or progressive platforms.

   Will Americans intending to hold their noses and vote for Biden, as a less worse alternative to you know who, even get to vote though?

   The US November General Elections look a horrific scenario from this distance. Travesties of democracy have riddled the primaries. A complex voting system, bent Electoral College, legalised gerrymandering in various states, outrageous voter suppression measures by State and District, decrepit voting machines, typically less polling stations than required–and now C19 just to top it off. Vote, or risk the virus, is a real dilemma for the vulnerable. Republicans have put various fixes in to forestall needed effective mail in voting at this stage.

   Sometimes you have to charge ahead with a progressive platform despite the odds, history will not view the sell outs in the Democratic ranks from Mr Clyburn on down, kindly if Trump “beats” Biden–yes if you fight you may lose, but if you do not fight you will definitely lose!
   • Adrian Thornton 7.1

     4 May 2020 at 3:22 pm

     "if you fight you may lose, but if you do not fight you will definitely lose!" +1 there pal!, but as we know these people don't want to fight, they are way more comfortable compromising with the enemy, who of course very rarely reply in kind.
8. RedLogix 8

   4 May 2020 at 10:03 am

   The chronic issue for the left in the USA (and most other places for this matter) is that the electoral alliances they need to hold together are far more fractious and fragile, than the ones on the right.

   The policy outlined above looks like good solid boilerplate Dem policy that in any other developed nation wouldn't attract much controversy. If they get even half of the list in the OP done it would be a major victory and a long overdue update of their political and social landscape. The CV19 crisis may well be the trigger to get the process moving.

   But their alliance contains contradictions; for instance on the economic front what the socialist/greenies want is directly opposed to what the unions want. The intensity of the culture wars alienates important socially conservative groups like the Latino's and Catholics. It an alliance that really only holds together when they have a strong charismatic figurehead, like Clinton or Obama. Biden just doesn't tick that box.
   • aj 8.1

     4 May 2020 at 9:21 pm

     ……electoral alliances they need to hold together are far more fractious and fragile, than the ones on the right.

     +1
9. AB 9

   4 May 2020 at 12:27 pm

   I'd have some doubts on Biden's level of commitment to this programme – and on his leadership ability to get it implemented and his willingness to cut across the economic interests of any of his donors. But whatever – if I was a US citizen and in a swing state I'd vote for Biden. In a non-swing state I might just go fishing instead, or just vote for Democrats down-ballot.

   However, I would respect the 'agency' of anyone who said they couldn't vote for him – for example Chris Hedges (whose eloquent Jeremiads I quite enjoy) says he won't vote for Joe because Hedges teaches in a prison and many of the black young men he teaches are there only because of policies Biden helped put in place years ago. Or any woman who felt that Joe seems only a bit less ‘rapey’ than Trump.

   I see your list has nothing on foreign policy – and I've seen nothing from Biden that suggests he would change the gangster criminality of US behaviour towards places like Venezuela. At least Sanders was starting to move (reluctantly maybe) towards a humane foreign policy after initially focusing on internal matters.
10. Adrian Thornton 10

    4 May 2020 at 3:04 pm

    How can anyone seriously think Bisen can have a plan and implement it? FFS! I would take bets that he isn't even allowed to drive.

    Are we all meant to just go along with this weird alternate world of fantasy land and not even acknowledge that Biden is quite clearly suffering from some sort of advanced and serious age related mental decline?

    The DNC and liberal MSM are treating people like fucking morons…distressingly many people seem happy to just be treated that way…like braindead dribbling morons..holy crap.

    BTW here is a real indication of what Bidens people have in store.. ..'Mike Bloomberg at the World Bank, Jamie Dimon senior position at the Treasury'….

    Here's who Joe Biden is reportedly considering for top positions in his administration as he touts a 'Return to Normal' plan

    https://www.businessinsider.com.au/who-joe-biden-will-appoint-to-top-cabinet-positions-axios-2020-3?r=US&IR=T

    …not to mention he is an alleged rapist….the good ol’ moderate centrists extremists have really got themselves into a disgusting mess this time….luckily for them, they have already thrown out their morals and any ethical standards they might have had long ago, so I guess it will be an easy choice for them.
    • The Al1en 10.1

      4 May 2020 at 4:27 pm

      …not to mention he is an alleged rapist….

      Totally devastating and insufferable for a victim, and goes without saying it's obviously very wrong without consent, the alleged fingering isn't a rape, it's a sexual assault.
      • The Al1en 10.1.1

        4 May 2020 at 4:46 pm

        Withdrawn.

        For 80 years prior to the 2013 change, the UCR’s definition of rape was “carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will”

        Rape in the United States is defined by the Department of Justice as "Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_the_United_States
        • Adrian Thornton 10.1.1.1

          4 May 2020 at 5:16 pm

          Holy shit…did you just say "the alleged fingering isn't a rape, it's a sexual assault" not sure how to reply to that, and I don't need the US dept of Justice to tell me what is right or wrong either.

          As I keep saying you centris have let yourselves go so far down into the dark rabbit hole of an ideology that has no moral or ethical component to it, that you have (or are losing) that thing that is so precious to humans, your own internal sense of moral and ethical balance…surely you shouldn't need to google up that stuff?
          • The Al1en 10.1.1.1.1

            4 May 2020 at 5:32 pm

            Holy shit…did you just say "the alleged fingering isn't a rape, it's a sexual assault"

            I didn't say it, I wrote it, but yes, based on outdated information, which as you can see, withdrew.

            I don't need the US dept of Justice to tell me what is right or wrong either.

            Neither do I, which is why I prefaced the comment accordingly.

            As I keep saying you centris have let yourselves go so far down into the dark rabbit hole of an ideology that has no moral or ethical component to it, that you have (or are losing) that thing that is so precious to humans, your own internal sense of moral and ethical balance

            I'm not a centris (sic), but then again I'm also not flailing on the outside, on the edge of the fringe, wondering why it's the rest of the world that are losers.

            surely you shouldn't need to google up that stuff?

            As I wasn't aware of the 2013 change to US law, I'm glad I did check the definition, and saved myself the ignominy of having to retract after a smug 'gotcha'
            • katipo 10.1.1.1.1.1

              4 May 2020 at 6:57 pm

              Pity the mainstream media and the Democrat machine never addressed this during the Primaries or even gave Biden a similar amount of scrutiny as they did during the the Brett Kavanaugh hearings. Not only does it make them seem hypocritical and send the wrong kind of message to possible abuse victims it also makes more difficult for the Disillusioned to differentiate Biden from Trump or to bother to vote.
              • The Al1en …

                4 May 2020 at 7:11 pm

                I don't have a horse (or say) in the democrat race, other than obviously not wanting Trump reelected, but yeah, it does seem like people, the vast majority of dem voters who overwhelmingly backed him, and senior party figures alike, are holding to different standards around the allegation.

                I'm pleased I don't have to vote him to vote out the current president.
    • roblogic 10.2

      4 May 2020 at 4:35 pm

      OK, but the Trumpian status quo is worse. Zero leadership. Government barely functioning. 65 000 dead and counting from coronavirus. Foreign relations in tatters. USA becoming a global laughing-stock. Armed insurrectionists allowed to parade in the streets.
      • Adrian Thornton 10.2.1

        4 May 2020 at 5:23 pm

        I hear what you are saying, and agree, in fact I am having this same debate with one of my sons at the moment vis-a-vis climate change/Trump/Biden etc.

        I certainly wouldn't hold against anyone who was going to to vote Biden (talking abstractly here from NZ of course) as the lesser of two evils etc, I personally couldn't do it.

        However at the same time I will not be told that he is any kind of progressive or even that much better than Trump…he is better,sure, but not by much.

        As I have said, my biggest problem is that he is mentally deteriorating in front of our eyes and the liberal media (including RNZ) say nothing and go along with this bizarre charade right out in the open..truly one of the craziest things I have ever witnessed in my life, sometimes I feel like I am watching a movie it is so surreal.
11. Wayne 11

    4 May 2020 at 4:28 pm

    Biden won't preside over a radical do over of the US economy or society, so the programme outline above won't happen, at least not in the way suggested. In fact quite a lot of it is beyond his jurisdiction as President. It belongs to the states. He also has to negotiate with Congress.

    I reckon he will be able to do the following;

    1. Healthcare will be an enhanced Obamacare package.

    2. Taxes will be as described with a lower income earner tax reduction.

    3. Climate change will have a bunch of incentives but nothing like the AOC package.

    4. Dreamers only, no general amnesty leading to citizenship

    5. Education will close to what is set out, especially since so many people will be retraining

    6. Gun control will be nothing like described. But there will be more checks and a national or state register.

    7. Workers will get a federal minimum of $15, but there won't be a massive expansion of union power.

    8. Most of the crime stuff belongs to the states
    • Gabby 11.1

      4 May 2020 at 6:57 pm

      Depends if Bitch McTurtle and his Merrie Muscovites make it back.
    • Dukeofurl 11.2

      5 May 2020 at 1:53 pm

      Theres a lot existing Federal Gun laws in US

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_United_States#Major_federal_gun_laws
12. bill 12

    4 May 2020 at 7:11 pm

    President Joe Biden will cure cancer. Remarkable!

    And yes, he's actually said that. Twice that I've seen.
    • Incognito 12.1

      4 May 2020 at 11:03 pm

      https://www.factcheck.org/2019/07/unpacking-bidens-and-trumps-big-cancer-promises/
      • bill 12.1.1

        4 May 2020 at 11:41 pm

        I've no idea why anyone would think such a ridiculous claim should be subjected to any "fact check". Kinda makes you wonder what the whole "fact check" business is about, aye?
        • Incognito 12.1.1.1

          4 May 2020 at 11:55 pm

          Some take these claims literally but usually there’s a kernel of truth in there somewhere …

          I actually enjoyed reading that fact-check and I have almost zero interest in the claimants.
          • bill 12.1.1.1.1

            5 May 2020 at 1:23 am

            Some take these claims literally but …

            What do you mean 'but'…? Biden said it straight up – that he'd 'cure cancer'. Twice. He's a fucking fool…or reckons everyone else is.
            • McFlock 12.1.1.1.1.1

              5 May 2020 at 3:21 am

              No, he said "we're gonna" cure cancer. Very different to "I'm gonna".

              Seems pretty obvious that he thinks it's an achievable goal if they throw money at it, rather than that he'll spend one day a week doing his own oncology research.
              • Dennis Frank …

                5 May 2020 at 4:43 am

                Funny, eh? A century of throwing zillions of dollars at the cancer industry and he thinks tossing more down the gurgler will actually work.

                Someone ought to sit him down and explain to him in words of one syllable how vested interests operate. A perpetual money supply is the primary requisite. All that takes is a suitable niche within the upper echelons of capitalism. Then you get your pr guys to spin a mythology for public & media consumption: `we're gonna cure cancer'. The suckers will buy the heroic stance forever…

                But of course he already knows that. That’s why he’s running to be their front man.
                • McFlock …

                  5 May 2020 at 4:53 am

                  If you want to look at oncology progress over a century, it's pretty damned spectacular. Firing a few billion more at primary research over the next few years would improve on that.

                  Personally, I'd elevate focus on heart disease and brain disorders (dementia, parkinson's, that sort of thing). But the big C is still a big killer.
                  • gsays …

                    5 May 2020 at 10:29 am

                    Perhaps lift the focus a little higher and rather seek to understand our own immune systems.

                    Autoimmune disorders can reek havoc: diabetes, Rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, M.S. etc.
                    • McFlock …

                      5 May 2020 at 10:35 am

                      also worthy causes.

                      Significantly better than relaxing mercury emissions controls.
                  • Dukeofurl …

                    5 May 2020 at 2:00 pm

                    Heart Disease ?

                    Guess who made a big campaign promise about heart disease and fairly soon he broke it.

                    In October, a month after he suffered a heart attack and had two stents inserted, Sen. Bernie Sanders told Dr. Sanjay Gupta of CNN that he would release his medical records. No ifs, ands, or buts, Sanders stated, “The people do have a right to know about the health of a senator, somebody who’s running for president of the United States—full disclosure.”

                    Bernie is a year older than Joe
                    • McFlock …

                      5 May 2020 at 2:05 pm

                      Not entirely sure that's relevant to the concept of increasing funding for medical research.
                  • gsays …

                    5 May 2020 at 2:45 pm

                    What are these mercury emissions of which you speak?
                    • Andre …

                      5 May 2020 at 3:02 pm

                      That would be the mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. Which have been progressively more and more tightly regulated and had been a significant factor in shutting down coal plants. As well as improving the health of people nearby.

                      Until the stygian homunculus rolled back the regs just a few weeks ago. To put more money into the pockets of his big buddies and donors that sell that filthy black poisonous shit.

                      https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-epa-coal-mercury/trump-administration-expected-to-weaken-mercury-rule-for-coal-plants-idUSKCN21Y1IW

                      By the way, emissions from coal power-plants that haven't been adequately scrubbed to remove mercury also usually contain significant aerosolised radioactives.

                      https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1997/fs163-97/FS-163-97.html
                    • gsays …

                      5 May 2020 at 3:16 pm

                      Aahh. Cheers Andre. Sorry can't reply directly to you.

                      As a cynical aside, I would suggest the owners of these toxic plants probably have their hands in a lot of other pollies pockets too.
                • Incognito …

                  5 May 2020 at 11:23 pm

                  I don’t blame you for not reading that factcheck link I provided in my comment @ 12.1.1.1 but until you educate yourself on the topic of cancer and government-funded cancer research your opinion will be largely based on ignorance and not really worth debating IMHO.
13. millsy 13

    4 May 2020 at 8:17 pm

    What Biden will do is exactly what happened with Obama.

    1) Biden will sideline most progressives in favour of Clinton/Obama retreads in his administration.

    2) He will end up allowing his opponents to set the agenda and struggle to get even moderate initives through Congress, end up with comprimises that please noone (ie Obamacare).

    3) Because of this, the Democrats will lose both houses in 2022 and Biden will finish his term as a lame duck president.

    4) Fox News will make out like he is a Trotskyite Marxist revolutionary who plans to overthrow the capitalist system, abolish Christmas and make every man transgender.

    5) Trump will effectively position himself as a shadow president and will criss cross the country making speeches attacking Biden.

    6) Trump will end up winning in 2024, and Biden will be the Jimmy Carter of the 21st Century.
    • Koff 13.1

      4 May 2020 at 9:02 pm

      Do you seriously think that Biden, Trump, or Bernie for that matter, at 80+ would actually be capable of campaigning in 4 years time? At least Bernie probably wouldn't be totally brain dead.
14. Ken 14

    4 May 2020 at 8:27 pm

    When the backlash against trump happens – as it surely must……'The medicine might be worse than the cure'…..or something…

    The post-truth era is rapidly becoming the post-making-sense era.
15. adam 15

    5 May 2020 at 3:40 am

    "Debating the alternative America – not just eradicating the Trump family from politics – is where this election needs to go now."

    I agree with you on this point. The obsession with trump has been stupid waste of time and effort.

    But I think progressives will not support this from Biden, it's not enough. He needs to throw them a bone, and he is point blankly refusing to do that. So if he loses it's his fault, because the job of the candidate is to win votes. 2016 should have taught that lesson to people.
16. Andre 16

    5 May 2020 at 2:42 pm

    Given the past three years, a potted plant sitting at the Resolute Desk would be a huge relief compared to what's there now. Biden is certainly the candidate to meet that expectation.

    As for what might actually happen, well, things mostly happen when competent Cabinet members are appointed and they do most of the heavy pushing behind the scenes. Biden's performance in the Obama Administration where he actively got involved with the legislators was a bit of a rarity, and it's unlikely he'll be able to repeat that level of involvement again as prez. Not that it actually achieved much after 2010 when the Repugs got the numbers to implement their blanket policy of mindless obstructionism.

    So what actually happens will mostly depend on which cabinet members get hold of him the most to play Weekend At Bernie's with him in service of their priorities.

    Or maybe whomever he chooses for Veep will turn out to be adept at grabbing the reins and steering things according to her priorities.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS