The Biden administration (was: The NEW 2020 Election Thread)

[PermissionToLand]

Now they have to rewrite all history books in the USA to match his version of what happened.



/jarmo

Wouldn't be a surprise, the right has already rewritten textbooks to suggest the civil war was about "state's rights" instead of slavery. They have zero principles or morals.

I think Klobuchar would have been his best choice, more likable and would have helped Biden more in the rust belt/midwest, but this year being white was a liability within woke circles of the party.

 

Now that gave me a hearty belly laugh! Klobuchar! "Likeable"! 

God imagine seeing the first woman of color on a presidential ticket and your response is "being white is a liability now!". I mean, the racism is just so open it amazes me sometimes.

Here is a good question - Would Harris have gotten VP if men were options?  You know, the theory of bringing in the best person for the job regardless of race or gender? 

I dont think men were ever considered when the VP talk started.

Well there you have it, people. Senator doesn't believe that being a representative of the most historically subjugated minority in a country has any value. Funny, you'd think the job of literally REPRESENTING the people of a nation might be suitable to those who actually represent all demographics of the country and not just the dominant one. I guess the right disagrees. America should only be run by the white men who the existing power structure of white men decide are "most qualified" (as determined by metrics that are set by white men and reflect what white men value as important). You're really being open in your prejudice lately. It's refreshing.

Yes, it was good strategy to announce you're going to put a woman on the ticket with you.

I have to disagree there, announcing he would pick a woman of color before hand basically served up a talking point to the right, which you can see they are leaning on heavily in this very thread. If he just chose her without saying anything before hand, it would have denied them that talking point and still garnered all the appeal of a truly representative candidate regardless. Tactically, it was a bad move. But that's how it goes; Dems = good policies, bad tactics and optics. GOP = bad policies, good at optics and dirty tactics.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Unlike PermissionToLand, I dont see EVERYTHING thru the prism of race and identity politics.  And I'm not going to judge anyone as a racist just because they dont agree with me.

How well did Kamala Harris do in the primary compared to Amy Klobucher?  Sometimes people need some substance and  authenticity. Being of mixed Jamaican and Indian ethnicity as well as a female is how she was born, not a qualification.

Biden had to pick a black woman ( or he was going to have a problem) . And out of that field, Harris was the safest bet as far as doing no harm and it makes sense. Also, there was a prior working relationship there between Biden's late son Beau and Harris which likely helped.

[pilferk]

Yes, it was good strategy to announce you're going to put a woman on the ticket with you.

I have to disagree there, announcing he would pick a woman of color before hand basically served up a talking point to the right, which you can see they are leaning on heavily in this very thread. If he just chose her without saying anything before hand, it would have denied them that talking point and still garnered all the appeal of a truly representative candidate regardless. Tactically, it was a bad move. But that's how it goes; Dems = good policies, bad tactics and optics. GOP = bad policies, good at optics and dirty tactics.

One thing: Read what I wrote again.  I don't disagree with you, actually.  The "woman" part (which he committed to months ago) was good overall strategy.  Suburban women basically are what elected Trump, and they are the demographic moving away from him.  Committing to putting a woman on the ticket, to help appeal to that demographic and speak directly to them is a good idea, and it's not one the right REALLY latched on to.

The woman of color "implication" (because I don't think they ever outright said it), which was more recent (post Floyd) is really when the right went nuts.  Which...you know...speaks volumes.  But, honestly, I'm still not sure its effective.  The people that went nuts, and the talking heads who were up in arms, were likely not voting for a Biden ticket no matter who was on the other end. Their "racial objections" is just one more excuse, IMHO.

And I also completely agree with the last bit: Dems are AWFUL at messaging and optics.  Though I have to say...yesterday's campaign event hit all the marks.  It showed exactly why you want her on the ticket.  She humanized Biden in ways he hasn't been able to, so far.   It was a good look pretty much all the way around.  Even the awkwardness of the COVID prevention stuff played pretty well.  Makes them both look like they are taking this a lot more seriously than the Repubs.

[jarmo]

US calls for shower rules to be eased after Trump hair complaints https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53761744


 





/jarmo

[pilferk]

Unlike PermissionToLand, I dont see EVERYTHING thru the prism of race and identity politics.  And I'm not going to judge anyone as a racist just because they dont agree with me.

How well did Kamala Harris do in the primary compared to Amy Klobucher?  Sometimes people need some substance and  authenticity. Being of mixed Jamaican and Indian ethnicity as well as a female is how she was born, not a qualification.

Biden had to pick a black woman ( or he was going to have a problem) . And out of that field, Harris was the safest bet as far as doing no harm and it makes sense. Also, there was a prior working relationship there between Biden's late son Beau and Harris which likely helped.

Prepare for that ripping sensation again....

I dont see EVERYTHING thru the prism of race and identity politics.

*Proceeds to frame everything thru the prism of race and identity politics*

Seriously, do you not even understand what you just wrote?  I'm actually thinking you don't.

About a woman who has been in politics for most of her adult life. She was the San Fran DA. She was the AG of one of the largest, most populace, states in the country. She is a Senator and she's been there for as long as Trump has been president.

She arguably has more experience than Obama did when he ran at the TOP of the ticket in 2008.  And she inarguably has more experience than Trump did when HE ran at the top of the ticket in 2016.

You are the first (and only) person (not on Fox News) I've seen insinuating she's not well qualified and only was chosen for her racial/gender profile.  HOW IS THAT NOT MAKING AN ARGUMENT BASED ON RACE AND IDENTITY POLITICS??!!

Also, you continue to ignore the fact Klobuchar called Biden and outright told him she didn't want the job. She wasn't even a consideration.  I gave you the short list yesterday.  Of those options....who exactly would you have picked? Who was more qualified and a better fit?

As to how well she did in the primaries vs Klobuchar...um, we'll never know. Because she pulled out in December of 2019 BEFORE THE FIRST CAUCUS OR PRIMARY EVEN HAPPENED.  She ran out of money.  You can take that to mean anything you want, but what you can't do is compare primary results that never happened.

I'd also like to add my standard point, which provides context for most of your objections when it comes to anything Dem: You voted for Trump.  WHAT political and public service qualifications did he have when you voted for him? What foreign policy experience? How can you POSSIBLY take the piss out of ANYONE for a lack of qualifications here? Especially one that only seems to exist in your own mind....

[pilferk]

US calls for shower rules to be eased after Trump hair complaints https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53761744


 





/jarmo

He started this awhile back.....mentioning EPA regulations that restricted water flow through showers and toilets.

Given this report, and his penchant for fast food, I think we can surmise why he mentioned toilets, too.   

[jarmo]

He started this awhile back.....mentioning EPA regulations that restricted water flow through showers and toilets.

Yeah.

Still, it's like an episode of Seinfeld...




/jarmo

[PermissionToLand]

Trump on Kamala Harris: "Nasty woman"

Trump on pedophile & human trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell: "I wish her well"

[PermissionToLand]

Unlike PermissionToLand, I dont see EVERYTHING thru the prism of race and identity politics.

You literally made this about identity politics when nobody else was talking about it. You hear of the first woman of color as a VP and your response was purely about her identity and connecting it to a political narrative about "wokeness". Who do you think you're fooling? That's some very mediocre trolling, you know.

And I'm not going to judge anyone as a racist just because they dont agree with me.

Ah, the classic "you'd call a squirrel racist!". What a pathetic dodge. You're actually tacitly admitting you were being racist because you don't even try to defend what you said, you just immediately turn around and attack the person calling you out with a strawman. It's literally a scholarly recognized move of narcissists. "DARVO": Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender.

I called your statement racist because it was nakedly so; you see a woman of color breaking a barrier of society and your immediate impulse is to denigrate her and suggest she got the job because of "identity politics" instead of her qualifications. That is about as plain an example of racism as you get. That is exactly what racists in 1964 said about Martin Luther King. It's literally a trope of racism. And so is your response; to turn it around on the person calling you out instead of addressing the issue.

So when you walk like a duck and quack like a duck...

How well did Kamala Harris do in the primary compared to Amy Klobucher?  Sometimes people need some substance and  authenticity. Being of mixed Jamaican and Indian ethnicity as well as a female is how she was born, not a qualification.

Klobuchar... "substance and authenticity"!  

Do I need to repeat myself? "You'd think the job of literally REPRESENTING the people of a nation might be suitable to those who actually represent all demographics of the country and not just the dominant one... America should [not] only be run by the white men who the existing power structure of white men decide are "most qualified" (as determined by metrics that are set by white men and reflect what white men value as important)."

Why are you so afraid to actually respond to what I say with a direct rebuttal? It's pretty sad that you have to pretend I didn't say things so you can keep repeating the same thing. Kind of a microcosm of right wing "thought"; you just accept an ideological point on faith and repeat it no matter how thoroughly it's been debunked right to your face.  

Rebuttals and counter-arguments are Communist!!!

Biden had to pick a black woman ( or he was going to have a problem)

Yes, leaving a group of 41 Million people, who have been historically disenfranchised, without high level representation for yet another cycle IS a problem. It's pretty amazing that you can take issue with black people getting political representation and not see how that is racist.

[PermissionToLand]

The woman of color "implication" (because I don't think they ever outright said it), which was more recent (post Floyd) is really when the right went nuts.  Which...you know...speaks volumes.  But, honestly, I'm still not sure its effective.  The people that went nuts, and the talking heads who were up in arms, were likely not voting for a Biden ticket no matter who was on the other end. Their "racial objections" is just one more excuse, IMHO.

And I also completely agree with the last bit: Dems are AWFUL at messaging and optics.  Though I have to say...yesterday's campaign event hit all the marks.  It showed exactly why you want her on the ticket.  She humanized Biden in ways he hasn't been able to, so far.   It was a good look pretty much all the way around.  Even the awkwardness of the COVID prevention stuff played pretty well.  Makes them both look like they are taking this a lot more seriously than the Repubs.

Ah, I had the impression it was stated outright, but it may have just been various sources presenting it that way. I will say, it's remarkable how successfully the right have weaponized identity politics in a way that does pull people who are politically disinterested, so I wouldn't discount any effect it's had. Like I said, they're great at optics and tactical gaming of discussion; look at guys like Dave Rubin, Tim Pool and Michael Tracy who claim to be centrists or even Liberals to game the discourse by suggesting they are just calling balls and strikes when they are in reality repeating right wing talking points verbatim. And you'll notice those types lean HEAVILY on "anti-identity politics" rhetoric (which is itself identity politics, but again, they package it in a way that suggests it is not). And one of the reasons it's so effective is because the left has no organized pushback to it. The right has had Frank Luntz crafting rhetoric and we have... nobody. The right has countless billionaire funded think tanks, who in turn fund these youtubers like Rubin, Shapiro, and so on. Our youtubers are self-funded and don't benefit from youtube's algorithm like the right does. The right has had Rush Limbaugh spreading rhetoric for decades. We have... Thom Hartmann? 

In a funny way, I wish we were as collectivist as the right claims, because then we might have more organized messaging infrastructure (or any at all, frankly). That alone could be an angle of attack if we were crafting rhetoric; "the right claims to be all about individualism, but they collectively unionize to lobby their agenda?!?!?!  ". It's not even hard.

I didn't watch the announcement, but I have no doubt she will be an asset. The contrast of grown-ups running the show will be stark.

[tim_m]

Yes, it was good strategy to announce you're going to put a woman on the ticket with you.

I have to disagree there, announcing he would pick a woman of color before hand basically served up a talking point to the right, which you can see they are leaning on heavily in this very thread. If he just chose her without saying anything before hand, it would have denied them that talking point and still garnered all the appeal of a truly representative candidate regardless. Tactically, it was a bad move. But that's how it goes; Dems = good policies, bad tactics and optics. GOP = bad policies, good at optics and dirty tactics.

One thing: Read what I wrote again.  I don't disagree with you, actually.  The "woman" part (which he committed to months ago) was good overall strategy.  Suburban women basically are what elected Trump, and they are the demographic moving away from him.  Committing to putting a woman on the ticket, to help appeal to that demographic and speak directly to them is a good idea, and it's not one the right REALLY latched on to.

The woman of color "implication" (because I don't think they ever outright said it), which was more recent (post Floyd) is really when the right went nuts.  Which...you know...speaks volumes.  But, honestly, I'm still not sure its effective.  The people that went nuts, and the talking heads who were up in arms, were likely not voting for a Biden ticket no matter who was on the other end. Their "racial objections" is just one more excuse, IMHO.

And I also completely agree with the last bit: Dems are AWFUL at messaging and optics.  Though I have to say...yesterday's campaign event hit all the marks.  It showed exactly why you want her on the ticket.  She humanized Biden in ways he hasn't been able to, so far.   It was a good look pretty much all the way around.  Even the awkwardness of the COVID prevention stuff played pretty well.  Makes them both look like they are taking this a lot more seriously than the Repubs.

You're right, i don't believe he ever specified it would be a woman of color when asked at one of the primary debates. He said woman.

[tim_m]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/(CNN)The US Postal Service plans to remove hundreds of high-volume mail-processing machines from facilities across the country, leading some postal workers to fear they may have less capacity to process mail during election season.

Documents obtained by CNN indicate 671 machines used to organize letters or other pieces of mail are slated for "reduction" in dozens of cities this year. The agency started removing machines in June, according to postal workers.
While the reductions come amid decreased mail volume this year and are described by some postal officials as making the service more cost-effective, the effort overlaps with other actions implemented by the Postal Service that workers have blamed for delivery delays. The new procedures were described in a July memo and include staff hours being cut.
The removals are also occurring as President Donald Trump has relentlessly attacked voting by mail, falsely claiming that the practice leads to mass fraud. Amid the pandemic, a record number of voters are expected to cast their ballots by mail this fall. Trump said Thursday that he opposes additional funding for the Postal Service because he doesn't want to see it used for mail-in voting this November, though he later said at a news conference that he would not veto a bill that included the funding.
The Postal Service said in a statement that it "routinely moves equipment around its network as necessary to match changing mail and package volumes. Package volume is up, but mail volume continues to decline. Adapting our processing infrastructure to the current volumes will ensure more efficient, cost effective operations and better service for our customers."
But the Postal Service's own document calls the move a "reduction" of equipment. Postal workers in various locations said machines have been dismantled and that it wasn't immediately clear what the agency was doing with the parts.
Some of these machines have the capacity to sort up to 30,000 mail items and take only two Postal Service workers to run, according two machine technicians CNN spoke with.
They estimate it would take about 30 employees over their entire shifts -- they have to have scheme training to do the work -- to do that amount of work by hand.
The reduction effort has prompted questions and concerns among some postal union leaders.
A letter sent Wednesday from the National Postal Mail Handlers Union to the Postal Service headquarters asked, "Why are these machines being removed?" and "What is the anticipated staffing impacts in the facilities that are losing equipment?" The letter also asked if it's true that all equipment planned for removal has not been used since early May.
Chris Bentley, president of the National Postal Mail Handlers Union Local 297, which covers Kansas and part of Missouri, told CNN that postal management has already taken out four machines in Kansas City, two machines in Springfield, Missouri, and one machine in Wichita, Kansas.
Bentley said that even though total mail volume is currently down, he didn't understand why the machines were being removed rather than simply turned off and kept in place in case they are needed in the fall, when the Postal Service expects volume to increase with mail-in ballots, campaign materials and other mail.
"The comparison would be that if you have a room in your house that you are not using much anymore, you might turn the light switch off to that room, but you wouldn't call an electrician and have all the wiring removed from that room," he said.
Lamont Brooks, director of the clerks division of the American Postal Workers Union, said the Postal Service hadn't informed the union it was removing machines until the union asked about the issue in June, when it started getting calls from mail clerks about the dismantling of machines.
He echoed concerns about potential delays for mail-in ballots.
"There's no way it's not going to be a problem [for] Election Day," Brooks said.
Still, Paul Hogrogian, national president for the National Postal Mail Handlers Union, said he does not expect the dismantling of processing equipment to have a widespread impact on mail delivery time across the country, including in election season.
"A lot of the machines they are taking out ... a lot of them haven't been used in a while anyways," he said.
But he said it may be too early to tell if the Postal Service is taking out too many and that he has heard that plans to remove a few dozen of the machines are on hold.
"Maybe they are jumping the gun. Maybe they are not," he said.
While Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, a Trump loyalist, began his job in June, Hogrogian said he understands that plans to reduce equipment were in place before DeJoy started.
Last Thursday, the Postal Service told Democratic senators in a letter that the service is working to maximize the efficiency of processing and sorting equipment. "In some instances, we may be able to shift or remove equipment as appropriate," the letter said. It came in response to questions raised during a meeting of DeJoy, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
Democratic lawmakers last week called on the Postal Service inspector general to investigate operational changes at the agency.
Keith Combs, an American Postal Workers Union local president for the Detroit district, said that not only does the machine removal slow down the operation, but it also makes it a lot more difficult to keep the mail-sorting operation going There's a smaller pool of secondary machines available if another machine breaks down.
Combs said four machines have been removed in his area, and the remaining machines need to be reprogrammed to run more routes, which also increases the time it takes to process and sort the mail.
As a result, Combs says, workers are being told they need to stop running the mail-sorting machines at a certain time -- to stop any overtime accrual.
Combs has received reports from his union members that they're being told to not worry about delayed mail and to "let the mail wait to another day."
A Postal Service spokesperson did not specifically respond to a question about that allegation but repeated the agency's commitment to fulfill its role in the election process.
That also occurred in Maine, according to American Postal Workers Union Local 458 President Scott Adams. Sorted mail was 10 minutes late to the mail trucks, according to Adams, and was left because of new Postal Service protocols to not hold trucks for late mail.
While most of these delays center on second- and third-class, or bulk, mail, union members have told Combs this has, at times, included first-class mail.
"The Postal Service must complete the mission," he says. "Every piece of mail must go."13/politics/postal-service-sorting-machines/index.html

[tim_m]

https://apnews.com/14a2ceda724623604cc8d8e5ab9890ed


WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump frankly acknowledged Thursday that he’s starving the U.S. Postal Service of money in order to make it harder to process an expected surge of mail-in ballots, which he worries could cost him the election.

[tim_m]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/13/politics/trump-campaign-voter-fraud-lawsuit-pennsylvania/index.html(CNN)A federal judge in Pennsylvania told the Trump campaign and the Republican Party that they must produce evidence they have of vote-by-mail fraud in the state by Friday.

The judge's order, in a high-profile case about vote-by-mail in the battleground state, essentially forces the Trump campaign to try to back up President Donald Trump's false claims about massive voter fraud in postal voting.

[pilferk]

And now we have the right (and Trump) pushing another birtherism theory.

What the fuck.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53774289

[jarmo]

This bullshit didn't seem to bother him when he donated money to her campaign a few years ago.

The person hiding the most is the first to spread bullshit conspiracy theories. Ironic. Just like the biggest liar being upset about so called fake news.






/jarmo

[pilferk]

This bullshit didn't seem to bother him when he donated money to her campaign a few years ago.

The person hiding the most is the first to spread bullshit conspiracy theories. Ironic. Just like the biggest liar being upset about so called fake news.


/jarmo

It's being made pretty clear that Trump, and his right wing supporters, view any person of color as illegitimate and incapable of being President.

Unreal.

[jarmo]

What do you think of Jesus?

He didn't come to my inauguration for whatever reason.

 




/jarmo

[PermissionToLand]

Wouldn't it be poetic justice if Guns released a surprise album tomorrow and Sandman never got his copy in the mail because the USPS lost it thanks to Trump? 

[PermissionToLand]

https://apnews.com/14a2ceda724623604cc8d8e5ab9890ed


WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump frankly acknowledged Thursday that he’s starving the U.S. Postal Service of money in order to make it harder to process an expected surge of mail-in ballots, which he worries could cost him the election.

When you want to rig an election, you accuse your opponent of trying to rig it. Classic authoritarian playbook move.

But only Trump could trip over his own dick by admitting it outright.

And now we have the right (and Trump) pushing another birtherism theory.

What the fuck.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53774289

Nothing racist to see here! I can't wait for Senator to tell us how we're "just calling everyone [we] disagree with racist".

Gee, I disagree with David Duke, Senator. I guess he can't be racist just because I disagree with him though, huh?

Watch, he's going to try the "are you comparing me to David Duke?!" dodge, I'm calling it.