Joe Biden, Senator from Citibank (oops, DELAWARE), to Run for President

Schumer and Pelosi and Obama and the Clintons don't give a fuck

i hope he is finished, and that the DNC doesn't choose instead to keep his campaign on life support until november. i don't know who is the person or group to pressure, or how exactly this works. i would hope that someone in his campaign has some sort of conscience, or maybe just understands how grueling it would be - in the years after america knowingly elected a serial sexual assaulter, a second SC justice with a history of sexual assault was confirmed, #metoo, everything - to force millions of people to knowingly choose another assaulter, this time with a D next to their name.

for people who care about this, all of our leverage to get him to drop out is right now. with every passing day it will get harder and harder.

imo his strength purely as a candidate has only improved since the start of the pandemic.

ironically, he gets stronger as he disappears more and more. what if he just...went away, and someone else was the nominee? could be a very popular move!

i don't know who is the person or group to pressure, or how exactly this works.

A critical mass of people saying "I will not vote for Joe Biden, whether I'm in Wyoming or Florida."

That assumes the party godfathers would rather win than lose without bowing to pressure, which is a big assumption.

how grueling it would be - in the years after america knowingly elected a serial sexual assaulter, a second SC justice with a history of sexual assault was confirmed, #metoo, everything - to force millions of people to knowingly choose another assaulter, this time with a D next to their name.

they know the system works against survivors and they don't give a fuck and are just delighted that's gonna swing in their favor this time

xp to Karl:

afaics, people like HRC were relying on Biden's word for this. Hard as it may be to believe, politicians rely on personal friendships and trust relationships developed in private. Biden's private denials and reassurances would carry much more weight with them that his public denials.

roxymuzak - yeah, i think you're right. and i think them not doing anything is probably what's going to happen. i'm not the most optimistic person, but the only thing i can think of that provides hope is the idea of it all imploding for biden right now, in these weeks. that seems like the only possible way that it happens. there was a time when it was looking like even brett kavanaugh was going to go down. in the end, lindsey graham and his boys shut it down. i was so filled with rage with the GOP back then, because democrats were doing the right thing and speaking up about it and saying and doing the right things, generally, which left me with the impression that perhaps something had changed in the democratic party. now democrats are the ones who hold the power to do the right thing.

everyone who "cared" about kavanaugh and christine blasey ford but is looking the other way on Reade is full of shit imo. this isn't over yet, but it's looking pretty shameful for democrats.

on the plus side, it's very good to see you here, even on a really depressing topic :)

xp aimless

yeah, i can understand that for sure. for HRC, though, there's a difference between doing the standard biden-defense talking points and deflections, and announcing your full-throated endorsement of the man on a day when it's become clear that he did something fucked up (and destroyed reade's career in addition) and lied about it

xp - if you think the stakes around a Supreme Court seat are high, the presidency is even more crucial to the balance of power.

at this point there is more evidence than there was against kavanaugh

what is infuriating about both situations, though, is that there are other options! kavanaugh was one of many, many blowhard conservative judges for trump and republicans to install in the supreme court. they could have just bowed to public pressure and nominated someone else, endure a couple bad days of criticism from the worst people in the universe (limbaugh, whatever), and then enjoyed a bi-partisan senate vote for a non-sexual assaulter candidate.

with biden, there are also other options. this situation can and likely will get more excruciating as we get closer to november, and the other options really are cut off. but right now, in april? months before the convention? at a time when, in normal times, primaries would still be going on and people would still be arguing about which candidate would be best? as whiney mentioned, there are 6 months to go! that's not why he said it, but it's a good point!

xp

his strength purely as a candidate has only improved since the start of the pandemic

This appears to be the case on a surface level because he's said and done virtually nothing within public earshot or eyesight to change perception of him one way or the other, while his opponent Trump has made a historical ass of himself daily with his handling of this crisis. Once the pandemic starts to subside in the fall as the curve flattens further, and once Biden is actually forced onto a public podium and forced to actually speak full, coherent sentences about actual political policies and platforms, let alone attempt to "debate" his opponent over them, who will have plenty of ammunition saved up to unload on him (and far too much of it actually legitimate and true compared to his previous opponent)... that is almost certain to change. The wider media apparatus that basically allowed him to sleepwalk to the nomination after preemptively crowning him nominee after only 3 state primaries and is now widely ignoring the deepening of these sexual misconduct allegations will also laser in on him in from an adversarial standpoint like they did with Clinton back in Fall of 2016 when coverage on a purported "scandal" of the candidate becomes most profitable to deploy, deep into the primary. Except this time instead of fabricated "But her emails!!" nonsense it'll be a real sexual misconduct allegation corroborated and supported by a troubling number of outside sources. I'd also think his general cognitive decline that's been widely laughed off and ignored won't be given the same leniency once Trump has one or more viral moments making fun of him over it on a debate stage.

the Dems did manage to oust Al Franken but I just can't imagine them doing the same with Biden

like how would it even work? Biden's already got a ton of delegates. I don't really get this part of the process at all.

with biden, there are also other options.

If Biden drops out, then what? Who steps up to contest for the nomination? How does that process work? How do candidates (either folks re-entering the nomination race, or new folks) campaign? How are they chosen, with many primaries already over and others cancelled? Are all of Biden's delegates re-assigned to his former rivals, proportionally? Show your work. Walk through the process. And please try to remember that I didn't want Biden to be the nominee, and I don't like that he is the nominee.

xpost with frogbs

Well I mean they only started having primaries in like the 1960s, right? And they managed to nominate candidates for a couple hundred years.

Once the pandemic starts to subside in the fall as the curve flattens further

I believe there will be a second surge in September-October if not slightly earlier (August?).

The wider media apparatus that basically allowed him to sleepwalk to the nomination after preemptively crowning him nominee after only 3 state primaries and is now widely ignoring the deepening of these sexual misconduct allegations will also laser in on him in from an adversarial standpoint like they did with Clinton back in Fall of 2016 when coverage on a purported "scandal" of the candidate becomes most profitable to deploy, deep into the primary.

Journalists hated Hillary Clinton in a deeply personal way (and she hated them right back). They like Joe Biden.

Well I mean they only started having primaries in like the 1960s, right? And they managed to nominate candidates for a couple hundred years.

So what you're saying is, the Democratic Party should go back to the "smoke-filled room" model, and (by implication) you think a morally and ethically acceptable candidate is more likely to emerge from a return to that process?

give it to the candidate with the second most delegates

jk that isn't fair either, much as i would like it.

i think the biden delegates can rally around someone of their choosing. that's how it works.

Show your work. Walk through the process.

my more considered response is that it's not up to me (or anyone else here) to do that, but that i'm very confident it can be done. there are lots of very intelligent people out there. this is not impossible. it's not our job to come up with the process on a messageboard. for people like us, our job is to make sure that political leadership understands that a bunch of people don't want to vote for an assaulter. l

here is my less considered response.

as i said recently, if it were up to ME, i would just mail ballots out to everyone who voted in democratic primaries this year and last time around. any previous 2020 candidate, from beto to now, could be on the ballot (or not - they could opt out). since it's me doing it and i don't have to be realistic, i would also make it ranked choice, and it would be a national primary, rather than state by state with delegates.

let's take some Q&A

If Biden drops out, then what? amazing things
Who steps up to contest for the nomination? the next president of the united states
How does that process work? well it's complicated
How do candidates (either folks re-entering the nomination race, or new folks) campaign? they don't. since these goddamn elections never end, they already campaigned the last several months, we're all already exhausted from hearing about these people so much for the last year, and i know who john hickenlooper is.
How are they chosen, with many primaries already over and others cancelled? do-over. "do-over?!?!" yeah, do-over. it's unprecedented, but it's a better option than Biden as a nominee, at this point.
Are all of Biden's delegates re-assigned to his former rivals, proportionally? no

in general though, to unperson i would suggest letting joe biden and the DNC do the hard work of defending biden and arguing that it's not possible to nominate anyone else 6 months before an election (i wrote the previous sentence in a way encouraged to make people from other countries vomit in disbelief). everyone else who cares should be doing the hard work of saying that biden isn't acceptable

To add a thought, KM and unperson, you would still leave Biden on this ranked ballot, right?

well, not if he's withdrawing from the race, which is what he should be doing

if they really think there is nothing to these charges they can launch their own investigation, or turn to a neutral body, or something of that kind. he should be able to defend himself if he really thinks he's innocent.

i don't know the process. but ignorning this isn't going to work.

So what you're saying is, the Democratic Party should go back to the "smoke-filled room" model, and (by implication) you think a morally and ethically acceptable candidate is more likely to emerge from a return to that process?

Well I think the candidate is less likely to be a sexual assaulter than this one, yes.

I mention it because you can bet most voters -- Dem or otherwise-- doesn't know Reade or the allegations at all for obvious reasons. Imagine a Biden supporter reeling after learning Biden's withdrawing. There would have be to some kind of media saturation to remind voters what's at stake.

I mean presumably there are contingency plans in place, right? If Biden got hit by a bus presumably there's some kind of plan to choose the new candidate?

also, in my dreamland where anyone actually holds Biden accountable for his actions, here is my advice for bernie supporters: you may be tempted to argue that the nomination should go to the candidate with the second most delegates. and that's a defensible position! but i think it would actually be better for bernie to be on a ballot with a host of other candidates - his election plan was based on the trump model of being the candidate with the most support in a crowded field, with a plurality but not a majority of support within the democratic party. so let him fight it out again, and get the most votes again. he'll have more legitimacy as a candidate that way and ultimately come out stronger.

To add a thought, KM and unperson, you would still leave Biden on this ranked ballot, right?

none of this is happening anyway, but if it did, it would be because biden dropped out of the race out of some fit of "having a conscience", so i don't think he'd be on there.

Biden's base of support, I'll agree, tends to be weak...but it's stronger than Clinton's, especially among black voters.

I realize we're shooting shit on a message board, but to reach any critical mass about Biden's fate we'd have to:

(a) hear from more men and women to whom Reade allegedly confided the news;

(b) learn about other allegations

i welcome any more information about it that comes to light, but i don't understand what else needs to come out. if she's lying about this, it was very mean of her to tell her mom and friends about it, to the extent where her mom called into larry king in the 90s and mentioned it. the larry king thing is such a bizarre piece of evidence to come to light, but...it's pretty damning

why do we need more allegations? with kavanaugh there was only one truly strong allegation, the others ended up fizzling out.

Well, the brother changed his story after Nathan Robinson talked to him. I'm not saying the confidants were lying, but as I said on Monday as a reporter it bothers me instinctively that we didn't learn what they thought of Reade's initial less damning allegations.

i welcome any more information about it that comes to light, but i don't understand what else needs to come out. if she's lying about this, it was very mean of her to tell her mom and friends about it, to the extent where her mom called into larry king in the 90s and mentioned it. the larry king thing is such a bizarre piece of evidence to come to light, but...it's pretty damning

― let me be your friend on the other end! (Karl Malone), Wednesday, April 29, 2020 3:36 PM (two minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

why do we need more allegations? with kavanaugh there was only one truly strong allegation, the others ended up fizzling out.

― treeship., Wednesday, April 29, 2020 3:38 PM (one minute ago)

I mean, we're also in the middle of a pandemic when this news has been impossible to break through.

the others ended up fizzling out.

― treeship., Wednesday, April 29, 2020 3:38 PM (two minutes ago)

You found them less credible?

well, i'm going to assume that if reade was willing to appear on a podcast to talk about it and she has multiple people stepping up to back her up, we'll be learning more about the story in the coming weeks. if the story has enough momentum that even don lemon feels compelled to talk about it, then i'm sure 60 minutes or whatever is trying to book reade for an exclusive tell-all etc etc

the avenatti ones? yeah xp

but again, though - i don't understand why the evidence that's already there isn't enough. why would she tell family and friends about it back then, multiple times? the only thing i can think of is if she were fired for being a bad employee, or whatever, and she was too embarrassed to admit that so she made up a cover story that biden assaulted her? but maaaaaaan, come on. plus there's that whole thing about "believe the victims", seems important.

well that's the thing. this is the democrats' standard--they need to stand by it.

exactly! they talked a good game during the Kavanaugh hearings. let's see who actually believed what they were saying.

i just don't think they can be taken seriously if they don't at least seriously investigate this

i'm getting a little too soap-boxy again, sorry. i recognize that this is a complicated situation. i'm just kind of stunned that it hasn't blown up more. i guess i shouldn't be. i kind of cynically expect the republicans to make hay, too, eventually, although of course they have the whole history of being the party that endorses sex offenders so

the right is talking about this a lot as an example of left wing hypocrisy!

are they? i have been trying to avoid hate-watching/listening to rightwing media recently

i mean, he should have a chance to defend himself if he really thinks this is a false accusation. he could release internal records from that time. many things. but the standard is, "victims should be heard and have their testimony taken seriously." so they have to do that at least and not just say they "trust" joe.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/the-hypocrisy-on-tara-reade-is-a-national-disgrace/

they're honestly right. they need to apply the same standards to biden as they do to right wingers.

She also submitted to an NRO interview.