Infighting?
The following is an opinion piece well worth the brief time it takes to read it. It is short and to the point. The link to the full article is below. Speculating about what might/might not happen in an administration with someone at the helm whose faculties are slowly eroding, as many videos have shown, is valid, but the author’s assumption is that Biden’s slips and peculiar responses are par for the course with him.
From Powerline blog: This article in today’s Washington Post is called, “Biden’s flexibility on policy could mean fierce fights if he wins.” In the paper edition, it’s called “Biden’s fluid ideas portend fierce fights if he’s elected.”
Notice the difference. “Flexibility” is often a desirable trait in a leader. Having “fluid ideas,” not so much.
The article itself, by Annie Linskey, goes with flexibility. It portrays Biden as a skillful mediator of conflicting views. In the end, it’s something of a puff piece.
Linskey’s premise is correct, though. There are conflicting views among leading Democrats about how Biden should govern if he becomes president. Some would want him to govern from the left, as Barack Obama did. Others would want him to govern from the far left, as Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders would have done.
Fight House, Tevi Troy’s excellent book about infighting at the White House from the Truman presidency on, shows that ideological disagreement is, in fact, one of the best predictors of how fierce the fighting within an administration will be. On this basis alone, we can expect considerable White House tumult, if Biden wins. – article
The rest of the op-ed piece is here: https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/09/expect-epic-infighting-if-biden-becomes-president.php
If the meaning of tumult is taken literally, it can mean nothing gets done because so much squabbling and power-grabbing are going on that no one has time for anything else.
Read it to the end. The realistic suggestion is that so much infighting would occur, nothing would get done other than a Biden administration tilting to the far left. But maybe they’d just rip each others’ hearts out.
Category: "The Floggings Will Continue Until Morale Improves", Biden
Biden: I’ll say whatever to whomever to win (especially if my caregivers… er, handlers tell me).
Yes, it is really alarming.
https://youtu.be/iks184i9FOI
If there had ever been any intention to have a true and fair election, the demonrats would not have put a senile, creepy old white dude, and a known moral less skank to run for the top offices of the land. Again, 330 million some odd people in this country and this is the best they can do? Creepy Joe got the nod because he could be handled, not because he has any new or better ideas on how the country can or should be run.
Biden and Harris are both, two faced, lying, self centered egotists who will say and do whatever it takes to maintain their grip on power. Read their history before it is deleted and erased from all memory. They are looters and pillagers. They are two of the worst enemies of our Constitution that we have seen since the JEF left office. This is not just my opinion, this is going by statements that both of them have said, publicly. It’s not slander if it is the truth.
“Flexibility” means they will bend over backwards to sell us out to the foreign and domestic enemies of our Constitution, way of life, and this Republic.
“Fluid ideas” means they will piss down our backs and tell us it is raining.
The entire reason the DNC establishment suddenly and rapidly consolidated behind Biden was because he was the candidate with the highest “second choice preference” among all the establishment/corporate dems. It meant that he was the only one out of all he establishment dems that would have the most support if the rest dropped out. They did it to stop Bernie from gaining enough votes to win the nomination or create a contested convention. If any of the other democrats had the highest “second choice” support then the rest, including Biden, would have dropped out to consolidate the establishment strength against Bernie. The democrat establishment party cares more about defeating Bernie and suppressing the progressive movement in the party than they care about winning the election. And that is because their donors care more about defeating Bernie and suppressing the progressive wing. There is a reason Pelosi cuts off any party funding for any progressive that challenges a corporate democrat. Yet she not only releases funds but she endorses corporate dems who challenge 8ncu bent progressive. It is a clear double standard intended to run he progressives out of the party. There is a reason Biden has doubles and tripled down on opposing or vetoing progressive ideas. Including Medicare for all. Pelosi and the establishment prevented AOC and other progressives from having speaking roll at the convention. Instead limiting her participation to a single one minute pre recorded procedural announcement. By party rules someone had to nominate every candidate who had not dropped out. So procedurally someone has to nominate Bernie. It was the same procedure used on every Democrat convention in the last 100+ years. Right after the one minute, President, pre approved statement nominating Bernie. A procedural requirement. Dem establishment released a hit piece claiming that AOC the progressive were “dividing the party” and “weakening democrat chances against Trump” by nominating Bernie. It was a setup. And ambush. They assigned her to do it then slapped her in the face and called her and other progressive traitors for the nomination. Directly following AOC’s procedural statement they played a pretaped… Read more »
And, in a nutshell, that is why I am a socialist!
Not withstanding the occasional spelling errors in your post, you seem to be saying that the Old Guard Of The Democrat are intentionally ignoring the will of Progressives in order to appeal to a larger segment of the voting public. It’s called weighing the options, making some hard decisions, and calculating what is needed to win the election. They could build their platform on pleasing the Progressives, but that could drive away enough of the sway voters that the other side wins. Progressives can accept the fact that they don’t get to sit at the adults table this election, or they could split off, form their own party, and field a candidate. Of course, that will dilute votes for Democrat candidate, which could only help the Republicans. Shades of Sophie’s Choice.
Which is an admission that the “progressive” (seriously false advertising right there) agenda is not popular with the majority of Americans, and thus would not win with voters. Hmm, there’s a word for that… Oh yeah: democracy!
It’s very telling that the very same leftists shrieking about democracy are actively working so hard to subvert it.
Neo-feudalism, complete with self-selected neo-aristocracy, is regressive not progressive.
This.
You act like you care about workers. Why would you, when you aren’t one?
Actually read it all, and largely concur (with some considerable exceptions).
Honestly, I think the best thing that could happen in American politics is for the Democratic Party to fissure into a number of disparate parties. Or the Republican, but, of the two, Democrat seems the most fundamentally divided, currently.
Regardless, whichever party broke ranks would essentially hand the next few cycles to the opposition, but I cannot see a more realistic avenue to a feasible multi-party system.
The progressives consolidate under the donk/nevertrump banner.
The Ordinary Americans back Trump, and migrate their support to Elephant2.0.
There will be plenty of “independents” that were formerly one, and probably stay registered former, but vote the other side more than not.
The Republicans started in 1850 as the only explicitly Abolitionist party, and had the White House in 1861.
The Donks went from Kennedy to McGovern in a decade.
Again, concur. I doubt we will ever see a multi-party system in our lifetimes, as our system has devolved into myopic, four-year cycles. Democracy’s greatest failing is that people tend toward stupid and short-sighted.
No group within either party will come to a strong enough consensus willing to concede one election as a tactical withdrawal to better develop the next. Teddy illustrated this, 100 years ago; nothing seems to have changed.
1860 was a multiparty event, due in large part to both precursor major parties, Democrat and Whig, badly misreading the tectonic shift against Slavery and slave economics. Also badly misreading the “fire eater” intention to preserve the slave and slave-economics status quo and expand it into new territories no matter the cost and no matter prior agreements. The result was fracture politically, and enough reshuffling to allow the new party Republicans to win, but with enough disgruntled to decide to use force of arms to overthrow the hated “other”. A century and a half has been spent rigging the game against newcomer parties, so now they have to be hijacked, not rivaled. However, both parties have again -badly- misread the ordinary folks, instead focusing on their insiders. The insurgents of both are appealing because they F the insiders. The Donks mistake a noisy (and insane) hard Left minority for mass support. By radicalizing their party they drive othe normals. The rhino mistake was assuming the rubes were ok with “Donk light” and frequent losses on core issues to maintain “bipartisanship” that always seemed to be “moar Donk”. The Trump insurgency targeted the “what the hell do you have to lose” vote from -both- sides, thus his shocking victory. Folks were tired of losing to the insiders. Thus even Bernie Bros and Reaganites went Trump. -that- gave Trump four years to build a coalition. And build it he has. He has harvested millions of blue collar and minority voters, once irretrievably Donk, and melded them with the disgruntled-with-rino crowd. As a result, he is riding a potential tsunami in 2020, thus goading the Donks into -epic- mistakes like riot-fest and Creepy senile Joe. The Donks have plenty of dirty tricks left, and their “fire eaters” are clearly willing, again, to wreck the nation to preserve their dying ways. If you think Donk strategy “radical nuts” was bad, get ready for “despicable”. But too late, I think. Their opponents have a taste for fighting and winning, Trump has made winning look -easy-, and Trump has that gift of picking more winning fights… Read more »