The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election

Cdog923 said:
We're going to **** around and end up with four more years of Trump, aren't we. 
Click to expand...


giphy.gif


 
knapplc said:
Agreed. But that there were no emails never stopped the "buttery males" crowd in 2016.
Click to expand...
Except Hillary actually DID have an email server in her house that she was using for potentially classified emails. And she initially denied that she was using a server in her house. It's why the FBI launched an investigation. Ultimately they didn't prosecute.

The equivalent here would be if after Biden has now said there was no complaint filed, investigators turn up a complaint. Now Biden is lying about the material facts. It doesn't prove he committed assault, but it dramatically undermines his credibility.

Ulty said:
It's a bad look for Biden because he stumbled over his answer and had a couple of long pauses and was unable to give a response that could put the topic to rest. But there needs to be a compelling legal reason to search through those records.

This article provides more info from the U of Delaware about those records and why they cannot make them available: https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/30/politics/biden-senate-papers/index.html

It doesn't seem like a name search would even be possible. This is 1850 boxes of uncurated documents that Biden himself gifted to the university. It's not Google. Reade herself just tweeted that the complaint didn't even mention assault. And personnel files would be kept elsewhere. 

So I agree that there is no compelling reason to open up those records to look for a phantom complaint that has no reason to be among those papers, and even if it was, would not provide any evidence at all of sexual assault.
Click to expand...
The reason to investigate is because Reade has claimed that a complaint was filed filed Biden says there was no complaint.

 
RedDenver said:
I've thought that since the moment Biden became the likely nominee.
Click to expand...
He beat second place in Minnesota by 9%, beat second place in Michigan by 16%, beat second place in Florida by 39%, beat second place in Wisconsin by 31%, beat second place in Ohio by 56%. He's certainly not the perfect candidate, but the numbers show he was far and away the best chance at beating Trump. 

 
FrantzHardySwag said:
He beat second place in Minnesota by 9%, beat second place in Michigan by 16%, beat second place in Florida by 39%, beat second place in Wisconsin by 31%, beat second place in Ohio by 56%. He's certainly not the perfect candidate, but the numbers show he was far and away the best chance at beating Trump. 
Click to expand...
No, those numbers show he was the best candidate for the Dem primary. We won't know if he was the best candidate to beat Trump until Nov.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I feel sad for Biden because you know what he wanted to say...

"Look, that lady is lying, I didn't touch her, she is a nut, she is clearly trying to make some cash off this and ruin my chances, she is a liar"

But he can't say that, well...he can but it would cause problems.  

 
teachercd said:
I feel sad for Biden because you know what he wanted to say...

"Look, that lady is lying, I didn't touch her, she is a nut, she is clearly trying to make some cash off this and ruin my chances, she is a liar"

But he can't say that, well...he can but it would cause problems.  
Click to expand...


Why can't he? Our current president said "I moved on her like a b!^@h"

 
FrantzHardySwag said:
What evidence do you have to say he isn't? He polls better than anyone else as well. Everything we can measure says he's the best the dems had to offer against Trump.
Click to expand...
I'm saying that you can't use election results against candidate that aren't Trump and voters who aren't the same as the general election to then say Biden has the best chance against Trump. I agree that the polling for the general election is the best evidence we have, and that showed Biden and Bernie with roughly equal chances against Trump (both ahead of Trump by about 6 points on average). But Biden crushed Bernie in the Dem primary, which goes back to what I'm saying - the Dem primary is not a good indicator for the general election.

 
More and more speculation. The once confident Dems who pushed Biden may be having second thoughts if these press reports are to be trusted --  all of the speculation of ways to replace him even if he is nominated. 

https://theweek.com/articles/911903/smokefilled-room-that-could-oust-joe-biden

Never was former Vice President Joe Biden the 2020 dream. He promised electability and familiarity, which turned out to be good enough for a plurality of Democratic voters in the early primaries.

But now that every other Democratic contender has dropped out and dutifully lined up behind the presumptive nominee, that choice might be sitting less comfortably. Biden is campaigning from his basement, giving interviews in which he occasionally moves past gaffes into total incoherence, raising questions about his mental fitness. Worst of all, evidence for a sexual assault allegation against him begins to mount.
Click to expand...
But is the party leadership's commitment to Biden as solid as it once was?


 
Suppose, plausibly, it is not. Suppose they don't want to run a historically elderly candidate amid a pandemic that is deadliest for the elderly? Suppose Tara Reade's assault accusation and Biden's tendency to misspeak even from the low-pressure, high-preparation environment of his own basement further fuel the "two senile sex offenders" narrative of this election? Suppose enthusiasm continues to grow for running New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D), whom one poll found 56 percent of Democrats would prefer to Biden as their nominee? (Cuomo says he won't do it, but that could be an obligatory performance of deference to a party elder.)

"The presidential debates are in effect already occurring daily between" Cuomo and Trump, Craig Snyder, a former Republican Senate chief of staff, argued in The Philadelphia Inquirer. We don't have to suppose Democratic Party leaders have noticed; they undoubtedly have.

So if they wanted to replace Biden (whether with Cuomo, the veep nominee, or some arrangement of both) Democratic leadership could wait until after the nomination to do so. Then, as they did with Democratic vice presidential nominee Thomas Eagleton in 1972, they could ask Biden to step aside, citing his health.
Click to expand...


 
BlitzFirst said:
He polls better and gets more votes versus other democrats in a primary.  He has yet to get more votes versus Donald Trump in an actual election.

He polls the same as other Democrats versus Donald Trump in most of the polls.

What evidence is there that he is the best candidate versus Donald Trump?  There isn't much...other than Democrats really want him as the nominee.  We literally do not know if he's the best Democratic primary candidate versus Donald Trump...we only know that Democrats think he is.
Click to expand...
where is the evidence that bernie would be the better candidate?  

 
BlitzFirst said:
I dunno?  I didn't mention Bernie at all? 
Click to expand...
you were saying that joe hasn't proven that he was the best candidate to beat trump.   if you are not saying that bernie is...then who are you suggesting would be better?   i assumed you meant bernie since you are the biggest bernie guy on this board but maybe i am wrong and you think Maryanne Williamson would be the best candidate to beat trump?

 
I can see it now 2020 will come down to the candidate who can prove that he isn't as senile as the other guy and who can best defend the sexual allegations against him.    Again, a country of 350m people and we get this choice.  :bang

I heard a little clip on one of the news links that I posted, in which Hanitty is interviewing Mark Levin. Mark notes that Trump is Lincoln like in how he is standing up to criticism from the other side.  This shows how wacko crazy :wacko: the Trump side is. 

 
Back
Top