I checked out CNN, the NY Times and Washington Post today, and their winners and losers were amazingly inconsistent...beauty is in the eye of the beholder...
Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."
Bad news for Biden, he's running out of cash!
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/16/polit...ate/index.html
Joe Biden, the former vice president of the United States and the 2020 Democratic front-runner from the day he entered the race officially in the spring, ended September with less than $9 million in the bank after spending more money than he raised in the previous three months.
SIREN.
Then consider this: Biden's total cash on hand is less than all of his main rivals for the Democratic nomination, including even California Sen. Kamala Harris ($10.5 million) who has dropped precipitously in polling over recent months. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders ($33.7 million) has more than three times more left to spend than Biden, while Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren ($25.7 million) and South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg ($23.4 million) have well more than double Biden's total.
Those of us old enough to remember his failed presidential campaigns and the Anita Hill hearings have been warning that Biden as a candidate is better in thought than in practice. He is a lousy campaigner. That would be bad enough by itself but he has a lot of baggage from being in politics for as long as he has and it would take someone fairly nimble of thought to get out from under. He is not that person.
Hard to believe that Mayor Pete is sitting on twice as much cash as Joe. But then again, as SueAxe says -- maybe it's not that hard to believe. Pete had a very good performance and may punch up to be the moderate-in-waiting if Klobuchar cannot qualify for the next debate. (Still baffled by Kamala's fade).
I don't think that Biden has anywhere near the high negative/disapproval figures that Hillary had. But I agree that Biden, like Hillary, has a lot of establishment support but it may be mile-wide/inch-deep.
We have four major candidates who are in their 70's. Joe is the only one to me that really just projects "old." Trump, Bernie and Warren look like energizer bunnies in comparison.
A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
---Roger Ebert
Some questions cannot be answered
Who’s gonna bury who
We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
---Over the Rhine
I've read a few posts surmising that Ukraine and Syria won't play in Peoria...but I'm getting the feeling that it's not true. At least not in this case.
Trump is truly digging himself into a hole with some of his diplomatic positions, and the GOP folks in Congress are not happy at all. They may get to the point that they decide it is best to cut and run. I didn't think that would be possible, even just a couple weeks ago, but there is a shifting wind.
How does their own stance play out in the election? I have no idea. I don't see them nominating another person, but it may make a few folks rethink thoughts when an impeachment vote rolls around.
Of course, that whole scenario is a long shot, but when the voting public is laying out a feasible road to a Blue White House in the polls, anything is possible.
Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."
I agree more with Chicago's interpretation. To me, Biden appeared to not want to let Warren claim credit for the CFPB, after he had just proclaimed that he was the only one who had done "big things" in the past (which was a ridiculous overstatement). And he seemed very angry about it for some reason (I have a theory as to why, but it's rather speculative).
Warren, who: 1. clearly doesn't feel like Biden actually did very much in this case, 2. wants to push back on the narrative that Biden can claim credit for everything in the Obama administration, and 3. has historical beef with Biden, was not going to just roll over for Biden after that interjection, so gave the backhanded compliment to Obama "and everyone else who helped."
That's even leaving aside the gender subtext that I picked up on even without my wife pointing it out. I suspect that the exchange won't change many people's minds, though, as I think their interpretation will tend to line up with their prior preferences.
Here is the take, agreeing with Sage, of Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin:
Note the reference to audience reaction. Easy enough to say, "I thank you Joe and also President Obama, who made sure the CFPB was in the final version of Dodd-Frank."Finally, she awkwardly thanked President Barack Obama for helping to pass legislation for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, pointedly refusing to credit Biden, who had just explained his role in rounding up votes. It was not a classy moment, eliciting some negative murmurs from the crowd.
Kindly,
Sage
'But please note that I always penalize champion debaters appearing on a political debate. And then there's the champion of all debaters, Ted Cruz, who was so good at Princeton he has a national debate award named for him'
Last edited by sagegrouse; 10-16-2019 at 05:52 PM. Reason: More but not better verbiage
Sage Grouse
---------------------------------------
'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013
Of course things are always "subject to change", especially in the world of politics. But based on some casual conversations I've had with about half a dozen big time Trump supporters, I'm sticking to my prediction that the Syria/Turkey/leaving the Kurds in the lurch will NOT hurt Trump with his base. That's different than saying it will hurt him with GOP lawmakers in Washington. Many of them are absolutely livid (as shown by today's House vote to roundly rebuke the POTUS). But I still think middle American conservatives are more in line with Trump's way of thinking on this issue of getting out of wars.
And yes, this is a truly bizarre dynamic because these same middle American conservatives, just 5 years ago, would have screamed bloody murder if Obama had done the same thing to the Kurds. But I'm certainly open to being proven wrong.
Two risks to Trump:
1. Hurts with the voters, both in terms of the substantive issue of the Kurds and ISIS and the perception of accommodation to dictators.
2. Provides a reason to remove the President in the Senate, if GOP Senators think that Trump is a danger to national security or, more likely, a sure loser in 2020. Not necessary to be part of impeachment charges to sway the vote.
Sage Grouse
---------------------------------------
'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013