He's guaranteed to lose now. I can't see a universe where the mental gymnastics add up to deciding that this is a good idea. Don't get me wrong, it'd be funny as hell. But I'm really not looking forward to the idea of more Trump.
The whole "family members as advisors" thing is really making me want to watch the biden admin arrested development spinoff
"Hunter convicted? Thank God he isn't on the ballot, I'd never vote for him!"
I love it when a snarky neolib gets put in their place lol.
I love it when a snarky neolib gets put in their place lol.
If only they were capable of learning from it
This is what I was holding to for a long time but then watching them all panic this week made me question it
Like, I thought you all knew! I thought you knew he was a vegetable and was going to lose and were just fine with that because you want to lose. But if that was the plan why freak out now?
Because freaking out publicly in the media is part of making sure they lose, maybe?
Iron law of institutions. Joe Biden is merely a vehicle to power. Retiring Biden sidelines all the leeches and lampreys which have become attached to his gooch throughout his 60 year career in law and politics. All those people hold power today, and will not loosen their grasp one bit for the potental of having a more stable grasp on power tomorrow. Especially if their nepotism and personal connections don't promise a cushy high salary do-nothing job under a new administration.
Joe Biden is merely a vehicle to power. Retiring Biden sidelines all the leeches and lampreys which have become attached to his gooch throughout his 60 year career in law and politics.
Absolutely.
It's worth pointing out that his junior advisors have only been on board since pre-9/11. His most senior advisors were around for segregation, and thought Apartheid South Africa was cool and good.
This is partly why I suspect that this might be a generational factionalism in the Democratic machinery.
The old(est) guard and the functionally apolitical consultant/finance lanyards who honestly do just as well or better when the dems aren't in power. With the young(er) generation and B-tier of operatives now realising that the damage being done, to the party and the recent supreme court decision etc, might be too much to simply wait for their turn
In a way, it feels like it mirrors some of the divisions within the capital class itself. There's the bullish types who basically seem to accept that growth and the climate are fucked, and are now trying to rip the copper wiring out of the walls of the global economy while they can since they likely won't be around when it tips into collapse. And then there's the equally self-interested 'activist' capital class looking to keep the game going with green tech and new models for economic extraction etc because they want their gilded age too but know the old models won't last long enought for them to get theirs.
The old(est) guard and the functionally apolitical consultant/finance lanyards who honestly do just as well or better when the dems aren't in power. With the young(er) generation and B-tier of operatives now realising that the damage being done, to the party and the recent supreme court decision etc, might be too much to simply wait for their turn
This is part of why I think there's a huge liberal panic about how Trump being president again will destroy all of democracy or whatever. Because part of the Project 2025 stuff involves firing vast leagues of lanyard dorks and replacing them with hogs. Who knows if that would actually happen, but that's mostly afraid of losing their jobs.
Exactly. It's not about 'democracy'. It's about the right building a fortress within power structure of the country that excludes the bipartisan/democrat lanyard class.
That's the sliver of
that lives within me. From a Marxist perspective, is a state full of Democrat lanyards better than a state full of rabidly anti-worker chud lanyards, so that labor can organize with fewer legal barriers? Or would unmasking the state as an explicitly bourgeois institution help radicalize the working class and heighten the contradictions? Is there necessarily a "better" option relating to the ideological composition of the state, or is it irrelevant because of the fundamental bourgeois nature of the state regardless of who the lanyards are?Or would a state full of chud lanyards be so incompetent that organizing would be easier? I guess we'll find out since none of this is really in our control in the first place. Full machinations of capital
Don't underestimate them, there are plenty of competent fascists out there. Or at least, they aren't more incompetent than the average liberal dork
It would have to get extremely bad wrt the NLRB to change the labor organizing paradigm to wolf-style organizing. I was surprised Biden's anti-train worker move didn't do it for that industry.
I assume the state is hostile to our interests no matter who is in power. While, yes, having the IRS filled with hogs would suck.... the IRS already sucks.
The biggest change I can see is a federal government suddenly becoming hostile to whatever they call "woke". I expect we need to step up to protect federal employees who are LGBT, not Christian, etc. But again, Democrats aren't helping these folks in the states right now so IDK.
It sucks 😬
Yeah at best, having Democrats in place just slows the rate of fascist decay. It's not actually improving anything
It will absolutely happen. Trump reclassified tons of workers in the executive branch as easier to fire and even fought a court case to let him leave them that way.
Oh they're running him. They're running him and guilting you by claiming that anyone who doesn't vote for him is a fascist.
It's wild how codependent these parties are on each other to justify their own existences
Two sides of the same mechanism, working in harmony.
Yes, we have one party here. But so does America. Except, with typical extravagance, they have two of them!
-Julius Nyerere
The United States effectively has a one-party system, the business party, with two factions, Republicans and Democrats.
-
It seems like the only people who can get access to him are a clique of his immediate family and long time advisors. There doesn't seem to be an actual political party in the conventional sense. We're dealing with weird dynastic politics and power cliques.
So, it sounds like it's not so much "they", the dnc, are going to run him again, as that Jill and Hunter are going to run him again, and the rest of us can hang if it means Hunter gets some pardons or whatever it is they believe they're doing.
It's all fucked, there's nothing resembling a democratic process or even an organization behind this.
There doesn't seem to be an actual political party in the conventional sense.
This seems like it has larger ramifications
we can't worry about that right now, maybe when there's not a freakin Cheeto who's going to destroy all of democracy! Then we can maybe talk about the late Holy Roman Empire dynasty holding onto power (but if you try and talk about it we'll scold you as a Russian shill)I've been chewing on it for a while now. I don't think the Democrats are a political party. The GOP is. As much as they're weird mutants, they do have rigid party discipline, clear goals, and long-term strategies that have been extremely effective in realizing those goals. The fabled "Demographic shift" that was supposed to save the Democrats seems like fantasy now; The GOP has seized control of critical organs of government, entrenched itself to protect against electoral upsets, and can more or less rule by fiat via the SCOTUS.
Meanwhile the democrats have none of that. They're a squabbling band of also-rans who couldn't hack it in the GOP, lead by the coldest, most bloodless monsters on the planet. I think most Democrats are losers who had the narcissistic self-aggrandizement to be politicians, but lacked the courage or gumption to try to make it in the nazi-breeding alchemical furnace of the GOP. The Democrats are where these losers end up, pursuing safer, less taxing madness in the Democratic party. There are a few genuine moralists in there, too, who are misguided or fanatical enough to believe in the propaganda version of liberalism.
But as we can observe - There's little meaningful difference between the parties. The GOP are just democrats who are honest about what America is and proud of it, while the Democrats lie to the public and possibly to themselves about their goals and desires.
And when you've got a "party" of cowards who can't admit to themselves what they really are, and feel the need to make a superficial play of resistance to the GOP, you don't have much to align on. So most of them are craven opportunists, you end up with New York and California where all the scum who would be GOP are Dems because that's how they can access wealth and power. Their leadership are all Nazi liches of untold decrepitude and malice, so the Dems who actually believe in anything have no chance of pushing their agendas through. They're all absolute slaves to capital. The party is just so shot through with contradictions that it can't possibly advance any cohesive plan or enforce party discipline. They couldn't even deal with Joe Manchin, whether he was the designated Judas Goat or not.
You can see it in the leadership - Obama wouldn't codify Roe, Hilldawg ran with an anti-abortion VP, Pelosi stated there was room in the Dems for anti-abortion freaks, and Biden has been opposed to abortion his whole career and let Roe die without even token resistance. Meanwhile Abortion has been their most unifying propaganda asset for decades. It's all a sham.
So you've got a couple of cliques of warlords - Obama, the Clintons, Pelosi, the Bidens, and whoever else isn't too senile to function, trying to keep a lid on things while their minions jockey for access and power. Then you've got the vast swamp of absolute losers who think Sieg Heiling is tacky. And mixed in there are a couple of dorks who actually believe in something that isn't just pure, nihilistic evil, even if they are still capitalists.
When are we going to decide on a Gang of Four style name for it, or are we just gonna call it the Biden Clique
It's the most beneficial for the DNC. They raise more money under Trump as a "resistance party" without appearing like they are intentionally tanking their chances. If they win, they can continue to generally do nothing and let the bourgeoisie have their way, if they lose, they can fundraise better than before and run a "better" candidate next time, ie an Obama-type.
Putting someone new as the frontrunner introduces too many variables for the DNC. They should do it, but they likely won't.
The GOP is the “natural governing party” of the US, and dems are married to the idea of being perpetual underdogs.
Even from a liberal electoralist standpoint, this is bizarre. The Conservatives under Pierre Pollievre is set to win in Canada, but you know damn well that they aren’t going to act like the Liberal Party is an all powerful force, even though they have a parliamentary system and a strong enough opposition can block some stuff.
All indications are currently that Joe is the guy (closest advisors seemingly being his family- Jill is the most important and she seems especially delusional) Obama and Bill Clinton's public support for him).
I think we're in a two week period where he could be replaced but it only happens if swing state polling being done looks worse than terrible (aka losing outside of the margin of error in at least 3 of 5 swing states or any 2 of the Midwest). The only way this happens is through an organized donor revolt.
My guess is he's the nominee unless he dies which I think is also a very real possibility. Funniest timeline is he somehow weathers a donor revolt and then the October surprise is "Joe Biden dies from covid."
I've been around too many old folks dying to have confidence that he'll drop dead - people are resilient. Some rando schmuck getting pumped full of amphetamines like him would, but he's got the best healthcare in the world. At least it seems like the donors were already revolting half way through the debate...
He'll go out give the best debate of his lib life, everyone will be restored in his ability to win the election, and then whoops that cocktail of drugs just made his heart explode and he's dead. The DNC will likely resort to necromancy and have a mumbling zombie as the president before they try a different candidate though.
We could have an actual Weekend at Bernie's zombie candidate and libs will still say "if you don't vote for the puppeted corpse you are destroying democracy for the entire world"
They're saying right now they'd rather vote for Biden's corpse than for Trump, which kind of gives away that they don't give a shit about politics anyways
It's going to be an Air Bud moment: "There's no rule that says you have to be alive to run for office!!".
"Joe Biden dies from covid."
Always Sunny theme music plays
My guess is he's the nominee unless he dies
That can be arranged.
That can be arranged.
Undoubtedly they have their operatives that could do this, but why run the risk if nature is doing its thing?
Did you hear the news? The president has the authority to arrest Hillary Clinton!
They're not actually going to run Crooked Hillary now right? Like, they can't actually believe she'll have a chance.
I personally believe they absolutely will
Liberal optimism really is adorable. Like a child saying he wants to be a dinosaur when he grows up.
Man's got a whole medieval fiction epithet at this point. "Genocide Joe, the Sundowner".
This name is next to a boss health bar that’s mostly empty at the start of the encounter
https://youtu.be/eIpJmdxnP1E?t=106 starts playing but it's the recorder cover
Crazy how Sundown Joe can refer to either his mental state or his political views.
Jill Biden's in the most recent edition of Vogue talking about how much she likes the trappings of power, such as motorcades: https://x.com/pashedmotatos/status/1807768639824695362
the dems are cooked, the lich king and his queen aren't stepping down from the sickest rank and power they've ever experienced, the VP was dogshit in comparison and they're gonna do whatever they can to ride the motorcade into the sunset
Is Jill Biden actually saying that because I can't be bothered to read this entire article, but the author is the one writing about motorcades in the opening paragraph. It's not a quote or anything
Edit: that twitter account seems incredibly right wing and probably is trying to make that article seem worse than it is. I understand the desire to dislike Biden, but this seems like misinformation
That's an incredibly weird framing device, but that's the writer speaking, not Jill Biden.
It makes me think of Macron calling for snap elections when it was obvious his coalition would lose.
Maybe they know the crash is coming and want to leave their rivals holding the bag? Then they get to punish the voters for being unruly and not obediently holding to the center, and they're already blaming the left for losing power so they can use this to boost their own support while trashing their other rivals.
Stupid 4D chess bullshit. 👍
the crash is coming and want to leave their rivals holding the bag
This is the most likely motivation for sticking with the Lich , as well as the massive DNC fundraising boost a tRump II would cause.
This has been my nagging suspicion about the sudden calling of the UK election too.
Rishi's always been off for ridiculously paid board job, likely in finance around silicon valley, but the way it was called - the seemingly deliberately terrible optics, barely campaigning, completely fucking over much of the Tory party feels like more than just a fuck you to colleagues who didn't respect him and the racists in the party.
For the actual deep establishment of the UK (military, intelligence, billionaire class) this has always been a planned handover of power, but I think the urgency came not just from Rishi's spite but this class' concern that the Tories were going to complicate it with a vote of no confidence and end up having an election right when overlapping crisis hit - economic spiralling, food and produce shortages, and likely the UK stepping up involvement in at least Ukraine and maybe Israel etc.
It's been well known that Rishi never wanted to be a wartime PM despite his tough on Russia posturing. He's been criticised for it by Tory insiders since becoming PM basically. Then you've had the recent increase in official visits, defence conference panels, and meetings with Azov, the Ukrainian military, and associated defense industry people not just in the commons, often to a Labour-heavy audience, but even directly with Starmer's Labour party even instead of the current government. So I do wonder if the establishment basically called time on Rishi because they needed the safe, controlled pair of hands of Starmer high on a Labour victory in place before the escalation happens.
Interestingly, a Tory MP said something very similar on a podcast recently; about the UK planning a much more 'visible' role directly in the Ukraine war for the end of the summer/autumn that wouldn't be able to be half-hidden from the public. But he's also kind of a crank when it comes to a lot of right-wing conspiracy stuff like 'Covid totalitarianism' so who knows what that's worth.
That’s kind of what I think. Plus it’s the whole point of democrats.
Republicans do all the real governing and whenever their stunning, absolute confidence from the public even withers by the slightest amount, the democrats are brought in to soak up the blame and then heroically defeated by the GOP. Rinse and repeat.
they don't care. they can see it coming and anyone with the power to force him to step down is okay with that.
Anyone in the party with the power to get the ball rolling on replacing Biden will be, at worst, completely unaffected personally by another Trump presidency. In most cases, it would be financially beneficial for them.
We need to affect them personally then. No Brunch For The Wicked
