Arctic Sea Ice : Forum

Off-topic => The politics => Topic started by: Tom_Mazanec on November 07, 2020, 10:00:28 PM

Title: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 07, 2020, 10:00:28 PM
Will Biden be distracted from combatting AGW by C-19 the way Obama was by Health Care and the Economy?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 07, 2020, 11:37:27 PM
Cross posted from my post in the Science subforum:

The Parable of Mr. Smith

Mr. Smith is in his early thirties. He lives in the small house he inherited a few years ago when his parents were killed in an auto accident. He works at a full time minimum wage job.
In the spring he feels an ache somewhere in his body, but the water heater broke and he has to have it replaced. He takes a temporary part-time moonlight job to pay for it. In the summer the ache is worse, but the air conditioner breaks so he buys a new one...part time job continues. Then fall comes and his car breaks down. He continues working 60 hours a week even though the pain is getting severe. By winter the heater breaks down and what with other things he is working 60 hour weeks while in excruciating agony. Finally he cannot stand it anymore and takes time off for the doctor.
The doctor says to him "I believe in doing this quickly. If you had come to me a year ago, maybe even six months ago you could have been cured, and have a normal life expectancy. Now maybe a month or two. I have a list of hospices..."

Understand, with the narrowness of the election and covid preferentially killing Trump's elderly base and further showing up his incompetence I believe Trump would have won a narrow victory if Patient Zero had never contacted covid. So Biden probably owes his election to a SARS-CoV-2 virion particle somewhere in China last year. But if short term problems distract him we may lose a chance to solve a big long term one. And AGW is a high hanging fruit on the tree. It is easy to get people upset when the air stinks and colors clothing while the river burns (The Flats and Cuyahoga River in Cleveland), but GHGs are colorless and odorless and harder to get out of the industrial economy.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: oren on November 07, 2020, 11:56:06 PM
I'm afraid Biden will be distracted from most everything by an opposing partisan Senate.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on November 08, 2020, 12:23:17 AM
Will Biden be distracted from combatting AGW by C-19 the way Obama was by Health Care and the Economy?

In short, yes.  Whether you call it a distract or high priority is a matter of perspective.  He ran largely on combating the virus, so much will be expected from him.  Additionally, the economy and how it is affected by COVID will be at the top of his list. 
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on November 08, 2020, 02:01:01 AM
remember the discussions when bernie was in the race. I expect Biden to reverse most of the damage to policy done by trump but I don't expect an climate crusader. Biden adopted stronger rhetoric on the environment for the campaign. Biden is in his 70's old people do not change much.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: KiwiGriff on November 08, 2020, 02:57:10 AM
Just cleaning out the Trump swamp dwelling appointees to the EPA et al and replacing with persons on board with the modern world will make one hell of a difference.
As will the USA rejoining the IPCC and reinstating the USA standing on the world stage.
We do not need Biden himself to lead the crusade against AGW what we need is for him to make appointments that will do so .
 
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: be cause on November 08, 2020, 03:34:02 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if Joe retires after 2 years .. 50 years of service .. and hands the reins to the VP .. I don't know if there is precedent ? If not , this is the era of the unprecedented  and i would love to see it happen .
  Can Trump pardon himself as he leaves office or would he need to hand over to Pence and have him do it ? Unprecedented ?
  b.c.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 08, 2020, 03:46:56 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if Joe retires after 2 years .. 50 years of service .. and hands the reins to the VP .. I don't know if there is precedent ? If not , this is the era of the unprecedented  and i would love to see it happen .
  Can Trump pardon himself as he leaves office or would he need to hand over to Pence and have him do it ? Unprecedented ?
  b.c.
Closest would be Nixon and Ford in the 1970s.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: KiwiGriff on November 08, 2020, 04:38:44 AM
Ford was a Republican pardoning a republican President .

A Presidential Pardon is only for federal crimes.
Trump will be facing prosecution for illegal activity in New York and other  jurisdictions  that is not at a federal level.

I fully expect of string of indictments as soon as the inauguration of Biden occurs, pardoned or not.
Trump will be tied up in court cases for years to come even if he does bail so Pence can pardon him for federal crimes .

The Girl* tells me in her professional opinion Trump will not stand down as his narcissistic personalty disorder will make him unable  to deal with the concept of  defeat
* Senior lecturer in counselling and a view shared among her peers . 
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 08, 2020, 04:55:17 AM
I know there are big differences, that's why I said "closest".
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Sebastian Jones on November 08, 2020, 05:00:55 AM
In reply to your opening question Tom, I'd say not. He can walk and chew gum at the same time; he can form a competent COVID team and bring America back into Paris both.
Ironically, in America, Covid is so out of control that nothing short of a Melbourne style lockdown will work now, and there are too many Covid deniers in America for that to work (how weird is it that the country with far and away the worst epidemic has any deniers at all?), so Trump's waiting for a vaccine to miraculously heal it may be the best strategy now.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 08, 2020, 05:50:42 AM
I was not thinking that he can't walk and chew gum at the same time, I was thinking that a POTUS has a certain amount of political capital and power, and if it is focused on one issue it will not be devoted to another.
Obama announced 'this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal' but GHGs kept rising while he concentrated on healthcare and the economy.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: WildFit on November 08, 2020, 02:02:37 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if Joe retires after 2 years .. 50 years of service .. and hands the reins to the VP .. I don't know if there is precedent ? If not , this is the era of the unprecedented  and i would love to see it happen .
  Can Trump pardon himself as he leaves office or would he need to hand over to Pence and have him do it ? Unprecedented ?
  b.c.

No but he can step down a few weeks before his term ends and let Pence pardon him.

Would be a smart move but then he obviously is not smart but foxy and devious.

Question will be whether his EGO will let him do what's best for him, in the past that most of the time was not the case.


For some of his doings he would first have to lift them on federal levels for a POTUS pardon to be effective.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on November 08, 2020, 02:09:20 PM
In reply to your opening question Tom, I'd say not. He can walk and chew gum at the same time; he can form a competent COVID team and bring America back into Paris both.
Ironically, in America, Covid is so out of control that nothing short of a Melbourne style lockdown will work now, and there are too many Covid deniers in America for that to work (how weird is it that the country with far and away the worst epidemic has any deniers at all?), so Trump's waiting for a vaccine to miraculously heal it may be the best strategy now.

ON a per capita basis, COVID cases in America are similar to Europe.  Not sure what you mean by COVID deniers.  Everyone seems to agree that it exists, is widespread and is a growing concern.  There is a disagreement as to how best to proceed.  Is that what you mean?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Bruce Steele on November 08, 2020, 03:01:37 PM
Tom, “Obama announced the seas would stop rising in his administration“
Care to back up your bullshit with a source?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 08, 2020, 03:34:13 PM
Tom, “Obama announced the seas would stop rising in his administration“
Care to back up your bullshit with a source?

It was my memory of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2pZSvq9bto
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Bruce Steele on November 08, 2020, 04:31:32 PM
Tom, Care to fix your quote with what Obama said ? Because slowing sea level rise might have actually been possible if we had acted. We all know you had other priorities and voted against Obama anyway but you could at least quote him correctly.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: be cause on November 08, 2020, 04:37:22 PM
Tom, “Obama announced the seas would stop rising in his administration“
Care to back up your bullshit with a source?

Before you make false accusations, you should do a little careful research.

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/547906-this-was-the-moment-when-the-rise-of-the-oceans

Otherwise, you end up with egg on your face.  I think you owe Tom an apology.


I think not ! ..  b.c.

p.s. .. op deleted .
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on November 08, 2020, 04:40:19 PM
Tom, “Obama announced the seas would stop rising in his administration“
Care to back up your bullshit with a source?
Unfortunately, not entirely bullshit. Sea level rise appears to be accelerating, not slowing.

Even on this side of the pond many of us had high hopes in November 2008, but Obama was one person having to negotiate deals with a Congress stuffed full of corporate politicians of both hues owing too many favours to big business. So money had to be thrown at the financial crisis. Very little went to
- modernising infrastructure through repair and replacement,
- giving renewable energy industries a boost.
- giving people work directly.

An awful lot of it went to making sure rich people got richer and poor people did not. Sounds like what's happening again now? And after 2 years he lost his power as he lost control over Congress. So just bits and pieces since then as he resorted to Executive Order powers to make a difference. End of a sad story.

Biden
- reduce the pace of damage? Yes.
- reduce USA CO2 emissions? Yes.
Consensus = modest progress, so the frog will not notice the heat gradually being turned up underneath the pan.



Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 08, 2020, 04:43:44 PM
Done.
Of course it would have been possible if we had acted. But we didn't. Obama did not make it a priority, that is my point. If he had expended all his effort into getting us to act instead of saving the economy and fixing healthcare it would have been different.
I saw a cartoon on this forum. A couple waders are looking at a little ripple labeled "Covid-19" washing ashore in front of them. Behind them is a cresting tsunami labeled "Global Warming". The caption was something like (can't remember the exact wording, Bruce) "Well, at least we survived the wave."
I expect this forum as a whole regards AGW as a bigger problem than C-19. I suspect Biden may disagree.
EDIT: BTW I did not quote him I paraphrased him (since I did not remember the exact words). That's why i did not use quote marks.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: oren on November 08, 2020, 04:55:25 PM
Blaming Obama makes sense if you voted for him. If you voted against him, and considering he was almost powerless specifically because he lacked congress majority, the complaint rings hollow.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 08, 2020, 04:59:16 PM
It's not "blaming" or "complaining". It is an illustration of what I am afraid Biden's presidency is going to feature.
Abortion and AGW are America's two biggest problems imho. I lost on my number one issue, and I would like to think I had at least won on my number two issue. But I am afraid what happened with Obama and AGW is going to happen with Biden and AGW.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: karl dubhe2 on November 08, 2020, 05:11:40 PM
As with Obama, and the previous presidents, I'll wish the man and his administration lots of luck; they'll need it.

Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: vox_mundi on November 08, 2020, 05:20:40 PM
Quote
... I expect this forum as a whole regards AGW as a bigger problem than C-19. I suspect Biden may disagree.

Problems are not binary unless that's all you can see.

If you only look at problems through binary glasses, you will fail to see that functional administrations can work on more than one problem at a time.

Biden's Climate Change Mitigation Map
https://buildbackbetter.com/priorities/climate-change/

Climate change poses an existential threat — not just to our environment, but to our health, our communities, our national security, and our economic well-being.

At this moment of profound crisis, we have the opportunity to build a more resilient, sustainable economy — one that will put the United States on an irreversible path to achieve net-zero emissions, economy-wide, by no later than 2050.

....

Power Sector: Move ambitiously to generate clean, American-made electricity to achieve a carbon pollution-free power sector by 2035.

...

Agriculture and Conservation: Create jobs in climate-smart agriculture, resilience, and conservation, including 250,000 jobs plugging abandoned oil and natural gas wells and reclaiming abandoned coal, hardrock, and uranium mines — providing good work with a choice to join or continue membership in a union in hardhit communities, including rural communities, reducing leakage of toxics, and preventing local environmental damage.

...

Environmental Justice: Ensure that environmental justice is a key consideration in where, how, and with whom we build — creating good, union, middle-class jobs in communities left behind, righting wrongs in communities that bear the brunt of pollution, and lifting up the best ideas from across our great nation — rural, urban, and tribal.

...

... In the meantime, Mitch McConnell the GOP and MAGA will do everything in their power to stop him
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 08, 2020, 05:46:47 PM
Stacey Abrams has a plan to give the Democrats control of the Senate due to the two upcoming runoff races on January 5, 2021.  If the Democrats win these two runoff races then Kamal Harris will give them them a 51 to 50 vote majority and Mitch McConnell will no longer be the Senate Majority Leader.  The Democrats need to refocus to make this happen.

Title: "Abrams says Georgia Democratic Senate candidates can 'absolutely' win runoff races"

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/525015-abrams-says-democratic-senate-candidates-can-absolutely-win-runoff-races

Extract: "CNN’s Jake Tapper noted to Abrams on “State of the Union” that typically runoff races have a lower turnout compared to general elections and President Trump won’t be on the top of the ticket to mobilize voters.

But Abrams expressed confidence that Democrats have a chance to win both Senate races in Georgia that have moved to runoff elections.

“I want to push back against this anachronistic notion that we can’t win in Georgia,” she said.
Abrams said the runoff election has two Democratic candidates, Jon Ossoff and Rev. Raphael Warnock, who will be “working together to make certain voters come back.” She added the races will have more support from the Democratic Party due to the stakes of possibly controlling the Senate.

“This is going to be the determining factor of whether we have access to health care and access to justice in the United States,” she said. “Those are two issues that will make certain people will turn out.""
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 08, 2020, 06:00:24 PM
Quote
At this moment of profound crisis, we have the opportunity to build a more resilient, sustainable economy — one that will put the United States on an irreversible path to achieve net-zero emissions, economy-wide, by no later than 2050.
I will turn 92 in that year if I make it.
AbruptSLR, if the Senate is 50-50, does that mean that there is no majority leader? Or does the VPOTUS' party decide it?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on November 08, 2020, 06:13:29 PM
Stacey Abrams has a plan to give the Democrats control of the Senate due to the two upcoming runoff races on January 5, 2021.  If the Democrats win these two runoff races then Kamal Harris will give them them a 51 to 50 vote majority and Mitch McConnell will no longer be the Senate Majority Leader.  The Democrats need to refocus to make this happen.

Title: "Abrams says Georgia Democratic Senate candidates can 'absolutely' win runoff races"

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/525015-abrams-says-democratic-senate-candidates-can-absolutely-win-runoff-races

Extract: "CNN’s Jake Tapper noted to Abrams on “State of the Union” that typically runoff races have a lower turnout compared to general elections and President Trump won’t be on the top of the ticket to mobilize voters.

But Abrams expressed confidence that Democrats have a chance to win both Senate races in Georgia that have moved to runoff elections.

“I want to push back against this anachronistic notion that we can’t win in Georgia,” she said.
Abrams said the runoff election has two Democratic candidates, Jon Ossoff and Rev. Raphael Warnock, who will be “working together to make certain voters come back.” She added the races will have more support from the Democratic Party due to the stakes of possibly controlling the Senate.

“This is going to be the determining factor of whether we have access to health care and access to justice in the United States,” she said. “Those are two issues that will make certain people will turn out.""

I would call this a long shot, but not out if the realm of possibilities.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Bruce Steele on November 08, 2020, 06:16:34 PM
Tom, Thanks but where did you fix your quote ? Saying we could “slow” sea level rise if we were to act isn’t the same as stopping sea level rise. When you put words with someone’s name you should use the words they used not your interpretation. Please fix your quote.
 Walrus , I noticed you deleted your post. Bad form . Maybe you should apologize but since you are patient with us radicals i’ll let it pass. I kinda like having a few republicans around. Too bad we Dems didn’t get the Senate back so we could see if the US might respond to global warming. Two democrat Senators from Georgia might be more than any runoff can produce, but I guess the odds aren’t much worse than slowing sea level rise. We are here watching the Arctic melt out. The ensuing Alberto flip is gonna seal the deal on sea level rise for a few tens of thousands of years and nothing will change that in the time we have left . ~35 years. Maybe we could have bought another decade or two back in 2008.
IMO we should be planning our descent and not hoping for miracles.
 

 
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 08, 2020, 06:21:46 PM
...
AbruptSLR, if the Senate is 50-50, does that mean that there is no majority leader? Or does the VPOTUS' party decide it?

The linked article explains that V.P. Harris with a 50-50 Senate would make Chuck Schumer the new Senate Majority Leader, but it also describes the political leverage that this would give to potentially rogue senators on both sides:

Title: "A 50-50 Senate: Democrats in power but not control"

https://www.axios.com/democrats-50-50-senate-b7651b3a-3d91-4c8c-ac32-5059a03b9bef.html

Extract: " A President Biden would need a Senate majority to make good on many of his campaign promises.

That would happen only if Democrats make the bank shot of winning two likely Senate runoff races in Georgia in early January, climbing from the minority to a 50-50 split in the next Congress — with a Vice President Kamala Harris breaking tie votes.

•   That power, enshrined in the Constitution, would allow Sen. Chuck Schumer to act as majority leader, but Schumer would have to broker a deal with Sen. Mitch McConnell about everything from floor procedures to committee seats.

•   Democrats would still need to win 50 votes for any major institutional rule changes or big spending packages, and they'd need buy-in from potential rogue Democrats like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema.

•   Outlying Republicans such as Mitt Romney, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski could also hold leverage over their own party on narrow votes."
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on November 08, 2020, 06:32:46 PM
...
AbruptSLR, if the Senate is 50-50, does that mean that there is no majority leader? Or does the VPOTUS' party decide it?

The linked article explains that V.P. Harris with a 50-50 Senate would make Chuck Schumer the new Senate Majority Leader, but it also describes the political leverage that this would give to potentially rogue senators on both sides:

Title: "A 50-50 Senate: Democrats in power but not control"

https://www.axios.com/democrats-50-50-senate-b7651b3a-3d91-4c8c-ac32-5059a03b9bef.html

Extract: " A President Biden would need a Senate majority to make good on many of his campaign promises.

just about anything must be better than Mitch McConnell running the Senate, a 100% vile thing that he is.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on November 08, 2020, 06:40:14 PM
Tom, Thanks but where did you fix your quote ? Saying we could “slow” sea level rise if we were to act isn’t the same as stopping sea level rise. When you put words with someone’s name you should use the words they used not your interpretation. Please fix your quote.
 Walrus , I noticed you deleted your post. Bad form . Maybe you should apologize but since you are patient with us radicals i’ll let it pass. I kinda like having a few republicans around. Too bad we Dems didn’t get the Senate back so we could see if the US might respond to global warming. Two democrat Senators from Georgia might be more than any runoff can produce, but I guess the odds aren’t much worse than slowing sea level rise. We are here watching the Arctic melt out. The ensuing Alberto flip is gonna seal the deal on sea level rise for a few tens of thousands of years and nothing will change that in the time we have left . ~35 years. Maybe we could have bought another decade or two back in 2008.
IMO we should be planning our descent and not hoping for miracles.
 

 

Bruce, yes I did not notice the subtly difference between slow and stop.  Still I thought your response was much too harsh for the post.  Sea level rise has neither slowed nor stopped.  Actually, I am neither dem nor rep and have been known to vote for either or in some cases, neither.  Glad to hear you like to have dissenting voices around.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 08, 2020, 06:57:05 PM
Quote
Tom, Thanks but where did you fix your quote ? Saying we could “slow” sea level rise if we were to act isn’t the same as stopping sea level rise. When you put words with someone’s name you should use the words they used not your interpretation. Please fix your quote.
I removed my paraphrase and copy pasted Obama's original words in the two times I recall paraphrasing him.
Where do I still say he would stop as opposed to slowing SLR?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Bruce Steele on November 08, 2020, 08:12:36 PM
Tom, Done ,Thanks.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gandul on November 08, 2020, 11:40:14 PM
I’d think it would be good Biden is mentally incompetent, if it wasn’t because the VP looks like a sociopath to me.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: NevB on November 09, 2020, 07:04:02 AM
I’d think it would be good Biden is mentally incompetent, if it wasn’t because the VP looks like a sociopath to me.

No evidence of that at all, did you watch Bidens speach ?

It was delivered with full meaningful coherent sentences in a strong confident voice.
(Even correcting his stutter mid sentence)

He seemed to be talking direct to the audience without pause to look at the teleprompter.
This was certainly not the performance of a man lacking any mental competence.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 09, 2020, 01:02:11 PM
Are the True Trumpists extreme enough to try to assassinate him? I hope he does not go out in public like earlier POTUSs have.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on November 09, 2020, 06:00:22 PM
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/21547245/joe-biden-wins-2020-climate-change-clean-energy-policy
Joe Biden will be president, but there will be no Green New Deal
Without Congress, he’ll be limited to executive action, just like Obama.

Quote
[size=9
pt]Much of the sweeping climate agenda in the plan requires legislation, which is not going to be possible with Mitch McConnell in charge of the Senate. There is some slim chance Democrats in the House and Republicans in the Senate can work together to pass more stimulus, or do something on infrastructure (which could include plenty of climate-friendly stuff), but the most likely result is that McConnell continues his strategy of scorched-earth partisan warfare and nothing but essential budget bills pass.

Biden can make climate progress without Congress

But there is an enormous amount that Biden can do with the presidency alone.

He can immediately begin reversing Trump’s massive deregulatory moves, restoring the more than 125 rules Trump has reversed or weakened.

He can instruct the Environmental Protection Agency to develop a more ambitious version of Obama’s Clean Power Plan for the electricity sector, to work toward his goal of net-zero emissions electricity by 2035, and the Department of Transportation to develop, as his plan promises, “rigorous new fuel economy standards aimed at ensuring 100% of new sales for light- and medium-duty vehicles will be electrified.” He can grant California the waiver it needs (which Trump is now in court trying to block) to pursue its own ambitious vehicle standards.

He can end Trump’s oil and gas development bender on public land, reimposing protections and encouraging safe development of renewable energy, and restore the “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) rule to prevent water pollution. He can restore and strengthen the rules on methane leakage from oil and gas operations that Trump rolled back.

One of the most important structural moves Biden can make is to use the powers granted to him by the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation to ensure that the Federal Reserve, and the financial system more broadly, takes climate risk into account, channeling investment away from carbon-intensive projects.

If he is feeling particularly bold, it is within Biden’s powers to declare climate change a national security emergency, which would give him the power to implement industrial policy directly, boosting the production of electric vehicles, EV charging infrastructure, long-distance electricity transmission lines, solar panels, or other materiel needed to address the emergency.

Perhaps most importantly, Biden can reassure America’s international partners that it is back in the climate game. His foreign policy powers as president are limited only by his ambition. Rejoining the Paris agreement is only the first step.

Beyond that, he could rejoin the World Health Organization and push it to better address climate health risks. He could convene smaller “clubs” of willing nations to hasten the development of key clean energy technologies or develop policies to address environmental migration. He could push forward international agreements around hydrofluorocarbons, deforestation, plastics, or other climate-adjacent issues.

There’s no way around it, though: To implement anything close to what’s needed, to muster the necessary investments and properly protect affected communities, Biden would need Congress. (If Democrats don’t win the Senate in 2020, Democrats have their next chance at a majority in two years, but it’s not a sure bet.) Without it, his climate accomplishments, like Obama’s, will be partial and inadequate.

Republican climate intransigence is not a problem Biden can solve
Biden will have plenty of backseat drivers on the left, convinced that if he’d just made this or that speech, endorsed this or that policy, wooed this or that lawmaker, he could have accomplished everything. But the baseline political fact, for Biden as for Obama, will be the sharp limits drawn by total GOP intransigence.

He can make enormous progress in four years — especially if he is fearless in his use of executive powers, willing to shrug off the inevitable scolding from Republicans and pundits — but there is almost certainly no way for the US to reach the Democrats’ shared goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 if the Republican Party sabotages clean energy policy at every opportunity. The next Trump (which could well be Trump himself) will just undo whatever Biden does, the Obama cycle all over again.

From a broader perspective, it’s just difficult to see how the US can stay on the extremely narrow path to midcentury decarbonization if one of the two major US political parties remains dedicated to defending the interests of fossil fuel companies and opposing anything “the libs” support. No climate plan Democrats ever implement, no matter how bold, can possibly remain immune to swings in government for decades. Republicans will periodically control government.[/size]
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: be cause on November 12, 2020, 12:55:59 PM
should I close this thread ?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 12, 2020, 01:25:52 PM
should I close this thread ?
Ummm...why?
Biden is going to be POTUS, right? Trump's Presidency was a top post collector before the Covid, so why close this?
Mind, you are the moderator, but what is the rational for closing this? Too soon? We can speculate on what he will do if that is the case, based on his statements.
Is it too controversial? That is what the subforum is like.
Why?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on November 12, 2020, 01:50:02 PM
should I close this thread ?
Ummm...why?
Biden is going to be POTUS, right? Trump's Presidency was a top post collector before the Covid, so why close this?
Mind, you are the moderator, but what is the rational for closing this? Too soon? We can speculate on what he will do if that is the case, based on his statements.
Is it too controversial? That is what the subforum is like.
Why?
IMNotHO, Absolutely wrong to shut this thread down. It is Biden's Presidency that may determine
- by how much global heating will exceed +1.5 celsius,
- whether the US can restore its position in the world at least to some extent,
- whether naked Capitalism will be tamed to give the less well-off at least a few more crumbs from the table.

Trump may leave the White House but he ain't leaving, or maybe Trump mark 2 will arise.....

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/11/us-trump-biden-president-elect
The US was lucky to get Trump – Biden may pave the way for a more competent autocrat
George Monbiot
Only if the president-elect is willing to fight big money and redistribute wealth can he stop the rise of someone far worse than Trump
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: oren on November 12, 2020, 03:45:58 PM
I get the feeling b.c. meant it cynically, because the Orange Idiot is gonna steal another term so there will not even be a Biden's presidency.  The "coup de twat".
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on November 12, 2020, 04:02:09 PM
I get the feeling b.c. meant it cynically, because the Orange Idiot is gonna steal another term so there will not even be a Biden's presidency.  The "coup de twat".
Beat me to the punch, Oren. The Orange idiot has a lot of people doing the biz for him.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/12/trump-election-concede-republicans-democrats
Republicans aren't conceding – and Democrats are bringing a knife to a gun fight
David Sirota
The Republicans’ bid to overturn the election is a full-scale emergency – and yet the Democratic strategy seems to be to pretend it isn’t happening
Quote
The recent HBO film 537 Votes, about the Florida 2000 election mess, offers one overarching message: Democrats’ refusal to sound a clear alarm about the slow-motion heist in process ultimately let the election be stolen.

In that debacle, Democrats seemed to think things would break their way with well-honed arguments inside the cloistered confines of the legal system – they never understood how public-facing politics can play a role in what ended up being a pivotal political brawl outside the courtroom.

Twenty years later, the lesson of the Bush-Gore debacle isn’t being heeded
Now, 20 years later, the lesson of that debacle isn’t being heeded. Donald Trump and his cronies are quite clearly waging a public-facing campaign designed to create the conditions to pull off a coup in the electoral college process.

This is a full-scale emergency – and yet the Democratic strategy seems to be to try to pretend it isn’t happening, in hopes that norms win out, even though nothing at all is normal.

In the week since the election, Donald Trump and his Republican allies have waged a public campaign to call the election results into question – not just in the courtroom, but in the public’s mind. Their lawsuits and Attorney General William Barr’s recent memo are designed as much to to generate headlines as they are to win rulings and initiate prosecutions. Their tweets asserting fraud, and their high-profile promises of financial reward for evidence of fraud, are all designed to do the same thing.

Most ominously of all, Republican lawmakers in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Arizona are already insinuating the results may be fraudulent, even though they haven’t produced any evidence of widespread fraud.

Why is public perception so important?
Because as the Ohio State University law professor Edward Foley shows in a frighteningly prescient 2019 article, legislatures could use the public perception of fraud to try to invoke their constitutional power to ignore their states’ popular votes, reject certified election results and appoint slates of Trump electors.

In an article that predicted almost exactly what has already happened in Pennsylvania, Foley imagined Trump seeming to be ahead at first, then losing his lead as votes are counted, then making allegations of fraud, setting the stage for this:

At Trump’s urging, the state’s legislature – where Republicans have majorities in both houses – purports to exercise its authority under Article II of the Constitution to appoint the state’s presidential electors directly. Taking their cue from Trump, both legislative chambers claim that the certified popular vote cannot be trusted because of the blue shift that occurred in overtime. Therefore, the two chambers claim to have the constitutional right to supersede the popular vote and assert direct authority to appoint the state’s presidential electors, so that this appointment is in line with the popular vote tally as it existed on Election Night, which Trump continues to claim is the “true” outcome.

The state’s Democratic governor refuses to assent to this assertion of authority by the state’s legislature, but the legislature’s two chambers proclaim that the governor’s assent is unnecessary. They cite early historical practices in which state legislatures appointed presidential electors without any involvement of the state’s governor. They argue that like constitutional amendments, and unlike ordinary legislation, the appointment of presidential electors when undertaken directly by a state legislature is not subject to a gubernatorial veto.


This is why we’ve seen Republican officials and policies continue pretending that Trump didn’t lose the election, and presuming that there will be a second Trump term. This isn’t merely infantile behavior or an immature temper tantrum – it is part of a cutthroat plan.

They are trying to normalize the idea that regardless of how Americans actually voted, a second Trump term is inevitable because state legislatures and Congress will ultimately hand him the electoral college.

Where is Democrats’ call to action?

… instead of sounding the alarm, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris seem to have settled on a “nothing to see here” approach.

The Biden-Harris campaign has been proceeding as if everything is fine, rolling out some transition team names and announcing that Biden has talked to some world leaders. Biden’s comments on Wednesday about the election were even more sedated and anodyne than those of Al Gore back during the 2000 Florida recount. The most he could muster was an assertion that the Republicans behavior is embarrassing and might hurt Trump’s legacy – as if this is a West Wing episode inanely presuming that any single Republican elected official in the country cares about such things.

And yet, we’ve been taught over and over and over again that real life most certainly is not a West Wing episode. The Republicans do not care about anything other than obtaining and holding power by any means necessary — they are T-1000 Terminators ruthlessly focused on winning at all costs.

So where is the call to action? Where is the activism? Where are requests for Democrats in the five Biden states with Republican legislatures to start pressuring their state lawmakers to commit to respecting the popular vote?

Biden may be calculating that any public pushback will only help Trump, and the best strategy is to try to starve the fraud allegations of attention. And sure, we may get lucky – things may eventually just sort themselves out with no big hullabaloo.

However, history suggests that it is pretty risky to bank on a passive strategy, leave it all up to fate and simply hope for the best through “normal” procedures during moments of obviously abnormal circumstances.

Indeed, refusing to wage a much more organized, public campaign to challenge Trump’s coup attempt is exactly the kind of strategy Democrats went with 20 years ago in Florida during the Brooks Brothers riot – and look how that turned out. We got an illegitimate Bush presidency that gave us the Iraq war and a financial crisis that ended or ruined millions of lives.

This time around it could be even worse – the end of whatever’s still left of American democracy.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: oren on November 12, 2020, 10:39:10 PM
It could well happen but I doubt a public campaign would stop such cutthroat plans.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: FrostKing70 on November 12, 2020, 10:53:52 PM
Lots of things to comment on in this thread!   Let's see if I remember them all the first time around:

1.  I believe the GOP will get at least one more seat either in the recount or run off election in Georgia.   This will limit what Biden can do, as the majority leader has amply demonstrated his willingness to hurt the US to keep the other side from gaining any ground.

2.  Biden will do what he can via executive order, which will help some.

3.  I believe the combination of CV-19 deniers and "Toxic Freedom" will doom any effort to control the virus before a vaccine is ready, and probably long after.   "Toxic Freedom" is the term I have been using to describe people who think their personal freedom to choose and live free is more important than helping the country and its citizens.

3A.  I have had several conversations recently that lead me to believe CV-19 deniers are more common than most believe.   This runs the gambit from a very intelligent mechanical engineer who believes the media is over hyping the situation and the doctors are inflating the number of infections and deaths because they get paid more, to a (retired) Registered Nurse who believes the talking heads on FOX and tweets by the President over articles published in peer reviewed medical journals!
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: FrostKing70 on November 12, 2020, 11:00:58 PM
I knew I would miss at least one!

4.  Recent polls have indicated that less than half of the US population is willing to take the vaccine, once available, due to a variety of issues (anti-vaccinators (sp?), lack of trust in a vaccine developed so quickly, etc)
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: wili on November 12, 2020, 11:04:24 PM
5. fewer than half the population will obey any future lockdown orders (mostly because hardly any Repubs will)
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Freegrass on November 13, 2020, 01:34:44 AM
Biden becomes president...

Biden will then have access to all the secrets of the Trump era...

Trump didn't think that far when he was in office...

But he knows now that America will see his tax returns and find out about all the crimes he committed in public office and beyond...

So what can he do?

He has to completely destroy the credibility of the Biden administration...

They''ll be "after him"...
The "Russian hoax" all over again...

Biden lies... They want to "lock him up".

It's all a political witch hunt...

And so now he's attacking Fucks news, because he wants his own media empire where he can do and say whatever he wants...

Megalomania to the limit!

But he's Trump... So he'll fuck this up for sure...

71 million votes...
30 million hard core?

And so the repukes can't do much, because their platform said; "Whatever Trump wants"...

Remember "the pledge"?

That was the day repukes signed their party and their principles away to a raging fool...

Let's hope Trump fucks up quickly, or he'll divide America completely into destruction...

Well done Putin!
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on November 13, 2020, 02:03:21 AM
Biden becomes president...

Biden will then have access to all the secrets of the Trump era...

Trump didn't think that far when he was in office...

But he knows now that America will see his tax returns and find out about all the crimes he committed in public office and beyond...

So what can he do?

He has to completely destroy the credibility of the Biden administration...

They''ll be "after him"...
The "Russian hoax" all over again...

Biden lies... They want to "lock him up".

It's all a political witch hunt...

And so now he's attacking Fucks news, because he wants his own media empire where he can do and say whatever he wants...

Megalomania to the limit!

But he's Trump... So he'll fuck this up for sure...

71 million votes...
30 million hard core?

And so the repukes can't do much, because their platform said; "Whatever Trump wants"...

Remember "the pledge"?

That was the day repukes signed their party and their principles away to a raging fool...

Let's hope Trump fucks up quickly, or he'll divide America completely into destruction...

Well done Putin!
Trump started avoiding recordings and destroying records after his first scandle in office. Trump will be jailed for crimes he committed as citizen. He may be using the election fraud bit to fund his debt. He owes aproximately 400 million. In the fine print of donation for legal challanges he can spend up to the first 8 thousand dollars on whatever he wants and 60% after that. Once the legal challenges are over he can spend the rest. Or something like that the exact details were not exactly clear to me.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: be cause on November 13, 2020, 02:23:04 AM
  .. so that's a 'yes' then ? ..  ;)  ;)  ;D
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on November 13, 2020, 04:10:58 PM
Lots of things to comment on in this thread!   Let's see if I remember them all the first time around:

1.  I believe the GOP will get at least one more seat either in the recount or run off election in Georgia.   This will limit what Biden can do, as the majority leader has amply demonstrated his willingness to hurt the US to keep the other side from gaining any ground.

2.  Biden will do what he can via executive order, which will help some.

3.  I believe the combination of CV-19 deniers and "Toxic Freedom" will doom any effort to control the virus before a vaccine is ready, and probably long after.   "Toxic Freedom" is the term I have been using to describe people who think their personal freedom to choose and live free is more important than helping the country and its citizens.

3A.  I have had several conversations recently that lead me to believe CV-19 deniers are more common than most believe.   This runs the gambit from a very intelligent mechanical engineer who believes the media is over hyping the situation and the doctors are inflating the number of infections and deaths because they get paid more, to a (retired) Registered Nurse who believes the talking heads on FOX and tweets by the President over articles published in peer reviewed medical journals!

1.  Agreed, and I think they will win both.

2.  This has become a more common usage with each successive president.

3.  I believe this will continue to exist, but diminish as the virus spreads this winter (even the most ardent believers will jump ship if personally affected).

3a. My conversations lead me to believe the opposite. Perhaps we are just talking to different people.  Polls are only as good as the demographics of those polled.

4.  I have heard also that less than half will take the vaccine, but it is not related to anti-vaxers, as they constitute such a small percentage of the population, but more related to your second aspect, in that the virus is being rushed into approval.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 13, 2020, 07:17:43 PM
If I were younger I would not take the hyperdrive warp speed vaccination. But I am a sexagenarian and my hazard calculations are biased by my higher vulnerability. So I plan to get vaccinated.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: sidd on November 14, 2020, 05:36:56 AM
Lauria at consortiumnews:  payback time

"four years of full-blown Russiagate, which was meant to question the validity of Trump’s election,  undermine his legitimacy and hamper his ability to act as president. "

"Don’t be surprised if Fox and other Republican outlets gear up to question Biden’s legitimacy for the next four years, the way Democratic media stirred up Russiagate madness the previous four years. Russiagate may morph into Chinagate "

https://consortiumnews.com/2020/11/12/election-2020-payback-for-russiagate/

Paybacks are a bitch, as a bookie i knew used to say. "Knew" because a few weeks ago I heard he had died. Lung disease, dont know if the current plague was involved.

sidd
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 14, 2020, 01:15:59 PM
sidd:
Sorry about your friend.
And was Russiagate et al payback for Obama being born in Africa etc., which in turn was payback for canceling Dubya...
Edit: I have been following this since Rush’s “Clinton Catastrophe” and it gets worse every time the WH changes hands. It’s gonna be bad this time.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on November 17, 2020, 05:31:49 PM
Lauria at consortiumnews:  payback time

"four years of full-blown Russiagate, which was meant to question the validity of Trump’s election,  undermine his legitimacy and hamper his ability to act as president. "

"Don’t be surprised if Fox and other Republican outlets gear up to question Biden’s legitimacy for the next four years, the way Democratic media stirred up Russiagate madness the previous four years. Russiagate may morph into Chinagate "

https://consortiumnews.com/2020/11/12/election-2020-payback-for-russiagate/

Paybacks are a bitch, as a bookie i knew used to say. "Knew" because a few weeks ago I heard he had died. Lung disease, dont know if the current plague was involved.

sidd

Hopefully, we will not have to endure another four years with claims of an illegitimate president.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on November 21, 2020, 01:29:09 PM
This post could have just as well been posted on The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/19/dear-joe-biden-are-you-kidding-me-erin-brockovich
Dear Joe Biden: are you kidding me?
Erin Brockovich

The president-elect has tapped a former DuPont consultant to join his Environmental Protection Agency transition board

Quote
Dare I say, I had hopes that this new administration would usher in the dawning of a new day. As picks for President-elect Joe Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) transition team were announced, I felt concerned and disheartened about a chemical industry insider being on the list. Are you kidding me?

Michael McCabe, a former employee of Biden and a former deputy Environmental Protection Agency administrator, later jumped ship to work as a consultant on communication strategy for DuPont during a time when the chemical company was looking to fight regulations of their star chemical perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) also known as C8. The toxic manmade chemical is used in everything from waterproof clothes, stain-resistant textiles and food packaging to non-stick pans. The compound has been linked to lowered fertility, cancer and liver damage. The Guardian reported this week that Harvard school of public health professor Philippe Grandjean, who studies environmental health, warns that PFAS chemicals, of which PFOA is one, might reduce the efficacy of a Covid-19 vaccine.

This smells of the dawn of the same old. To quote the Who: meet the new boss, same as the old boss. It should go without saying that someone who advised DuPont on how to avoid regulations is not someone we want advising this new administration.

PFOA pollutes the blood of nearly every American and can pass from mother to unborn child in the womb. This toxic product of industry is a stable compound not easily broken down in the environment or in the human body, giving it the nickname “forever chemical”. Scientists have found it in living beings across the globe – from animals living in the depths of the sea to birds on remote islands.

The Environmental Protection Agency has set no enforceable national drinking water limits for perfluorinated chemicals, including PFOA. Tens of thousands of community drinking water systems across the country have never even tested for these contaminants.

McCabe started managing DuPont’s communications with the EPA about the toxic chemical in 2003, according to an article in the Intercept. This was the time in which DuPont faced a barrage of litigation after the company dumped 7,100 tons of PFOA-filled waste in West Virginia, which made its way into the drinking water of 100,000 people. Countless members of the community faced debilitating illnesses as a result. The legal battle with the company was turned into the film Dark Waters in 2019.

Mind you, DuPont suspected that their product was harmful since the 1960s – experiments they conducted in 1961 showed that PFOS affected the livers of dogs and rabbits. McCabe’s work inevitably contributed to staving off costly clean-up and additional regulation headaches for the company.

Are we the people supposed to trust a former DuPont man in a transition team tasked with reviewing the Chemical Safety Board? Is this how the newly elected leadership wants to start what is supposed to be a healing and unifying administration? Are we already falling back on the old and antiquated, hide-and-seek, conceal, dodge and deny leadership or are you going to come out and be the change and the hope needed when it comes to the environment?

I don’t see how picking someone from industry is moving us toward that goal.

The science is in. Research has linked exposure to this chemical to the following illnesses: kidney and testicular cancer, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, pregnancy-induced hypertension and high cholesterol.

What will it take to get our leadership to work with the people?
This newly elected president says we need to listen to the science. Are you really listening to the science or are you listening to an industry insider, who is controlling the message?

With a lack of federal guidance on these dangerous chemicals, states have been left to create their own rules to enforce guidance and regulations. This chemical, and others like it, have been poisoning us for decades. Now is the time to act.

This is not about being rightwing or leftwing. It doesn’t matter what side of the aisle you are on. We cannot keep making picks from this inside, leaving we the people, once again on the outside.

What will it take to get our leadership to work with the people?

Stop working against and separately from your communities. Put your transition team on the ground and make them talk with those affected by these chemicals. Go out and see for yourself, learn and hear from those who you represent about what the heck is happening to them on the ground – those living and breathing in the toxic mess we have created.

It is time to keep your promise and give the people a voice and a seat the table in order to find a meaningful solution for the environment and for the people. Don’t close the door on us again.

We are in this mess because we continue to do the same old thing.

Let us not forget where these chemicals came from and who is responsible for putting them in our environment. Let us not bring the fox back into the hen house. DuPont executives should have no place in the Environmental Protection Agency.

I call on Joe Biden to do the right thing.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: kassy on November 21, 2020, 05:05:51 PM
It´s still the better turd...
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on November 22, 2020, 11:02:35 PM
It´s still the better turd...
A lottery of registered voters is starting to sound like a better method to pick politicians. The current system is designed to eliminate people with integrity.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: sidd on November 23, 2020, 06:00:29 AM
Re: lottery of registered voters

Sortition. Athens used it, back in the day. Among others.

sidd
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: be cause on December 10, 2020, 11:44:24 AM
Wow ! The excitement mounts ...
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on December 10, 2020, 12:29:39 PM
Wow ! The excitement mounts ...
And he hasn’t even started his term!
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: NevB on December 10, 2020, 02:11:17 PM
Wow ! The excitement mounts ...
And he hasn’t even started his term!

Hopefully this is where the boredom begins.

No personal financial scandals -> boring
No personal sex scandals -> boring
No attacks of tradition international allies -> boring
No persecution of the upright and decent patriots that stand up to fascists -> boring
(reality Winner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_Winner , Colonel Vindeman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Vindman and many others)

<rant>
I really hope this can be as boring as possible other than the prosecutions of Donny and every single one of his enablers that then changes the political climate in the USA and then the rest of the worlds democratic nations.

I hope that all the things decent governments support by decent people do soon become really boring again.
</rant>

<cynical extreme>
After this happens (or bloody anarchy that kills billions and could lead anywhere) we can then begin to think about maybe doing something about climate change
</cynical extreme>
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on December 10, 2020, 02:25:25 PM
Just keep in mind what a poster on the Alt-Hist forum said...a POTUS has a little bit of power to make things a little bit better, and a great deal of power to make things a great deal worse.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on December 11, 2020, 03:45:30 PM
Could the GOP act as a dog in the manger for Biden? Do they have enough power in Congress to hobble him?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on December 11, 2020, 07:00:48 PM
Could the GOP act as a dog in the manger for Biden? Do they have enough power in Congress to hobble him?

You never know.  The Dems had enough power in the House to hobble some of Trumps actions.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on December 11, 2020, 07:32:42 PM
Could the GOP act as a dog in the manger for Biden? Do they have enough power in Congress to hobble him?
mostly it depends on the results of Georgia run off election if Democrats win both seats they have the slimmest majority possible 50 50 with the VP Kamela Harris providing the deciding vote. 
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on December 11, 2020, 07:36:19 PM
Thanks, interstitial.
I checked, the elections are January 5. I'll be paying attention.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on December 11, 2020, 07:54:35 PM
All of trumps false complaints about voter fraud may suppress republican turnout. I hope so.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on December 12, 2020, 03:51:17 AM
Predictit gives Republicans a better than 60% to win each seat.  It should be noted that predictit overestimated Democratic performance in November.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Paddy on December 15, 2020, 09:11:49 AM
If I were younger I would not take the hyperdrive warp speed vaccination. But I am a sexagenarian and my hazard calculations are biased by my higher vulnerability. So I plan to get vaccinated.

I'm young enough to be low risk (not quite 40), but I plan to get vaccinated anyway, primarily since I could otherwise spread the virus if infected.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on December 15, 2020, 01:30:11 PM
Good point, Paddy.
I live alone, but do go out on occasion. Good reason for getting a shot.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: crandles on December 15, 2020, 03:18:53 PM
Probably a very silly random thought but...

Do you think Biden should pardon Trump for the attempted 2020 election steal?

Not at all sure it would be seen as a forgive and forget gesture that might help healing and co-operation (in congress). Um yeah, probably very little chance of that, but why not try?

Could possibly induce some cognitive dissonance in some republican supporters which might make them realise that maybe it is them that are on the wrong track? 

Suspect it would be dismissed as PR gimmick but what is your assessment of scope for good / harm?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: kassy on December 15, 2020, 10:48:39 PM
Why would Bidon pardon Trump for something he does not believe he has done?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: SteveMDFP on December 15, 2020, 11:09:07 PM
Why would Bidon pardon Trump for something he does not believe he has done?

I don't think Biden would or should do so.  Maybe Pence will take office for a week so a pardon for Trump could be done.

I think putting Trump in prison for a range of crimes (including trying to induce legislators to overturn election results) would create severe, dangerous unrest.  Also, any judge sentencing Trump to prison would be either terribly naive or brave--assassination of the judge would seem probable to me.

One better approach might be for Biden to issue a conditional pardon.  That is, if Trump gives a full confession in a "truth and reconciliation" manner, he'd be pardoned of all confessed crimes, but only those crimes he confessed to.  This might deflate the cult of personality in the country, while avoiding unrest.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Freegrass on December 16, 2020, 05:23:10 AM
Steve Schmidt (awesome guy from the Lincoln project!) just became a democrat... This means that the moderate repukes are now trying to take over the DNC... AOC and Bernie (the social left) will have to find a new party now...

Quote
On becoming a Democrat, former Republican strategist Steve Schmidt says “At the end of the day, there's now one pro-democracy political party in the United States of America and that's the Democratic Party. And I am a member of that party because of that. I'm a single issue voter. I believe in democracy."

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/530393-longtime-gop-strategist-steve-schmidt-announces-hes-registering-democrat (https://thehill.com/homenews/news/530393-longtime-gop-strategist-steve-schmidt-announces-hes-registering-democrat)

(https://www.leadingauthorities.com/sites/default/files/styles/650x430/public/images/schmidt-steve-speaker-3.original.jpg)
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Freegrass on December 16, 2020, 06:27:21 AM
#DiaperDon will continue to destroy the country that didn't reelect him...

GO TRUMP!!!!
MAKE AMERICA SMALL AGAIN!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1339083004216532993 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1339083004216532993)

Quote
Trump's allies slam Mitch McConnell for congratulating Biden https://mol.im/a/9057747 (https://mol.im/a/9057747) via
@MailOnline
. Mitch, 75,000,000 VOTES, a record for a sitting President (by a lot). Too soon to give up. Republican Party must finally learn to fight. People are angry!
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Freegrass on December 16, 2020, 07:59:34 AM
Steve Schmidt (awesome guy from the Lincoln project!) just became a democrat... This means that the moderate repukes are now trying to take over the DNC... AOC and Bernie (the social left) will have to find a new party now...

Quote
On becoming a Democrat, former Republican strategist Steve Schmidt says “At the end of the day, there's now one pro-democracy political party in the United States of America and that's the Democratic Party. And I am a member of that party because of that. I'm a single issue voter. I believe in democracy."

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/530393-longtime-gop-strategist-steve-schmidt-announces-hes-registering-democrat (https://thehill.com/homenews/news/530393-longtime-gop-strategist-steve-schmidt-announces-hes-registering-democrat)
Just asked Steve on twitter this;
https://twitter.com/FreeGrass69/status/1339099438527156224 (https://twitter.com/FreeGrass69/status/1339099438527156224)

Quote
Do you support the Green New Deal?
Are humans the custodians of God's gift to humanity?

I'm an agnostic...
Nature created us...
So nature = God.
Maybe I should have thanked him for joining the real party of Jesus...

"Hear, O Israel! The Lord Our God, The Lord is One; Thou shalt love thy Lord, thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind", before also referring to a second commandment, "And the second is like unto it, thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."

Sounds like socialism to me...
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: crandles on December 16, 2020, 01:29:28 PM
Why would Bidon pardon Trump for something he does not believe he has done?

I don't think Biden would or should do so.  Maybe Pence will take office for a week so a pardon for Trump could be done.

I think putting Trump in prison for a range of crimes (including trying to induce legislators to overturn election results) would create severe, dangerous unrest.  Also, any judge sentencing Trump to prison would be either terribly naive or brave--assassination of the judge would seem probable to me.

One better approach might be for Biden to issue a conditional pardon.  That is, if Trump gives a full confession in a "truth and reconciliation" manner, he'd be pardoned of all confessed crimes, but only those crimes he confessed to.  This might deflate the cult of personality in the country, while avoiding unrest.

I think you have that backwards:

Biden issuing a pardon would ensure Trump wasn't tried for trying to overturn election results (which might cause severe, dangerous unrest). A conditional pardon might result in Trump refusing and people taking what has happened as a sign Biden wants them to arrest and try Trump which might cause unrest.

Biden announcing he is going to issue a pardon would certainly be a pr stunt - arrest and trying Trump isn't going to happen (unless perhaps conditional pardon refused).

but is perhaps more conciliatory than the current situation of Biden criticising Trump for his legal throw the spaghettii everywhere and hope some sticks. I don't see this as encouraging congress cooperation.

With pardon, Biden gets to take the high ground of saying Trump shouldn't have done this but I am not bitter, I forgive him.

Conditional pardon seems a bad idea to me, looking like he is daring Trump to refuse and allow aggressive battles to continue.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Zeug Gezeugt on December 17, 2020, 02:59:01 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/19/dear-joe-biden-are-you-kidding-me-erin-brockovich
Dear Joe Biden: are you kidding me?
Erin Brockovich

The president-elect has tapped a former DuPont consultant to join his Environmental Protection Agency transition board

It's another neoliberal corporatist administration (https://harpers.org/2007/07/1934-the-plot-against-america/), like the last one, as the US remains a plutocracy (https://www.google.com/search?rls=en&q=us+plutocracy&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8) as far as I know.

The only real difference I can see is that the f*%$ing Neoconservatives are back in full control of defence and intelligence and will no doubt reinvigorate the now 2 decade  "war that will not end in our lifetimes" (Cheney) (https://books.google.com/books?id=ezyLJrAu1SIC&pg=PA1&lpg=PA1&dq=cheney+%22war+that+will+not+end+in+our+lifetimes%22&source=bl&ots=gjqWcI-ucy&sig=ACfU3U3oyTY3HZaqTMJlRx70utf5L5z9ng&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj_ha7U7NPtAhUuzzgGHaaKDv8Q6AEwA3oECAYQAg#v=onepage&q=cheney%20%22war%20that%20will%20not%20end%20in%20our%20lifetimes%22&f=false).

While Trump was obviously an embarrassing buffoon fascist for liberal minded Yanks, and followed the usual environmentally and pandemically destructive conservative domestic agendas, he was also the first president since Carter (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/01/fact-check-trump-not-first-president-since-eisenhower-without-new-war/6086636002/) to not start a new war. Although he's still got about a month to assassinate yet another Iranian Hero of the Revolution (https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/01/05/615391/Iran-Ahvaz-Qassem-Soleimani) to spark the long awaited Persian regime change war.

Which I'm sure Biden's insane American Nazi imperial war machinists (https://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/goeb36.htm), once re-installed at the head of the Pentagon and national security agencies, will be happy to engage with, although they'll probably need to use tactical nukes this time around.

Or ... sanity rules and the USA becomes a real global leader (https://web.archive.org/web/20050306155223/http://pilger.carlton.com/print/94988) in the fight against climate change and biosphere destruction (HA!)

How do people feel here about the new 'Democratic' US administration?

Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Paddy on December 17, 2020, 12:13:45 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/19/dear-joe-biden-are-you-kidding-me-erin-brockovich
Dear Joe Biden: are you kidding me?
Erin Brockovich

The president-elect has tapped a former DuPont consultant to join his Environmental Protection Agency transition board

It's another neoliberal corporatist administration (https://harpers.org/2007/07/1934-the-plot-against-america/), like the last one, as the US remains a plutocracy (https://www.google.com/search?rls=en&q=us+plutocracy&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8) as far as I know.

The only real difference I can see is that the f*%$ing Neoconservatives are back in full control of defence and intelligence and will no doubt reinvigorate the now 2 decade  "war that will not end in our lifetimes" (Cheney) (https://books.google.com/books?id=ezyLJrAu1SIC&pg=PA1&lpg=PA1&dq=cheney+%22war+that+will+not+end+in+our+lifetimes%22&source=bl&ots=gjqWcI-ucy&sig=ACfU3U3oyTY3HZaqTMJlRx70utf5L5z9ng&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj_ha7U7NPtAhUuzzgGHaaKDv8Q6AEwA3oECAYQAg#v=onepage&q=cheney%20%22war%20that%20will%20not%20end%20in%20our%20lifetimes%22&f=false).

While Trump was obviously an embarrassing buffoon fascist for liberal minded Yanks, and followed the usual environmentally and pandemically destructive conservative domestic agendas, he was also the first president since Carter (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/01/fact-check-trump-not-first-president-since-eisenhower-without-new-war/6086636002/) to not start a new war. Although he's still got about a month to assassinate yet another Iranian Hero of the Revolution (https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/01/05/615391/Iran-Ahvaz-Qassem-Soleimani) to spark the long awaited Persian regime change war.

Which I'm sure Biden's insane American Nazi imperial war machinists (https://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/goeb36.htm), once re-installed at the head of the Pentagon and national security agencies, will be happy to engage with, although they'll probably need to use tactical nukes this time around.

Or ... sanity rules and the USA becomes a real global leader (https://web.archive.org/web/20050306155223/http://pilger.carlton.com/print/94988) in the fight against climate change and biosphere destruction (HA!)

How do people feel here about the new 'Democratic' US administration?



I don't think that "war that will never end" ever did lose much vigour - the Trump administration was happy enough to ramp up drone bombings (https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/trump-escalates-killer-drone-war-and-no-one-seems-to-care/), while also making them less accountable (https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/05/22/obama-drones-trump-killings-count/), and the list of active battlezones has expanded to include Somalia and Yemen.

I think, however, in the current climate it would take a new 9/11 to push US public opinion in favour of launching a more conventional war again, or to push the Biden administration to doing more than drone strikes +/- air strikes.  However, the thing about the future is that it's always full of surprises, many of them nasty.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Zeug Gezeugt on December 22, 2020, 01:26:51 AM
Hi Paddy,

I think, however, in the current climate it would take a new 9/11 to push US public opinion in favour of launching a more conventional war again, or to push the Biden administration to doing more than drone strikes +/- air strikes.  However, the thing about the future is that it's always full of surprises, many of them nasty.

Cheney and Obama have both warned that the next 9/11 could be a nuclear terrorist attack, but hopefully the hawks won't go that far!

Although they'd probably need one to justify the use of tactical battlefield nukes if they ever get to launch a ground war against Iran, or China and Russia. The Pax Americana demands full spectrum dominance of any and all potential competitors!

The doves, however, will as you say stick with drones, missiles, and stealth planes.

So do you think Biden's forever-war cabinet is more dove or more hawk?

I'd guess the more dovish hawks would at least, in principle, have more resources available to address various urgent environmental concerns as our climate disaster slowly unfolds.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on December 30, 2020, 08:31:52 PM
From our favorite gadfly, John Michael Greer:
Into the Unknown Region
https://www.ecosophia.net/into-the-unknown-region/
Quote
Let’s move on. Another thing we don’t know about 2021 is exactly what policies the incoming Biden administration will pursue once Biden takes office in January. I assumed during the election campaign that if Biden won, he would lead a headlong flight back to the disastrous mix of neoliberal economics and neoconservative foreign policy that the younger Bush set in motion and Obama copied with such clueless enthusiasm:  that is to say, the policies that made Donald Trump inevitable. It’s quite possible that Biden (or rather, his handlers) will still do this, but there are several curious details that suggest an alternative view.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 02, 2021, 01:58:01 AM
Not to ruin the party, but the 2021 forecast is nightmarish
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/531925-not-to-ruin-the-party-but-the-2021-forecast-is-nightmarish
Quote
The year’s end is a time for reflecting on the past year and preparing for the new one. Most people are looking forward to moving past COVID-19 and its lockdowns and returning to “normal life.” But, for Joe Biden, still popping Champagne corks after the Electoral College vote, 2021 may be creeping up to become his worst nightmare. America was severely broken and fundamentally changed during 2020 and it will take a long time to fix it — a job that President-elect Biden is unprepared to handle.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Sciguy on January 06, 2021, 08:09:03 AM
It looks like the Democrats are going to win both Senate seats in Georgia, which will mean they effectively have won the Senate (a 50 - 50 tie with vice - President elect Harris casting the tie breaking votes).  This means Biden will get his cabinet secretaries and Supreme Court (and other Federal justices) approved. 

I wouldn’t be surprised to see a couple of Republican senators switch parties in the next year.  Trump’s anti-democratic coup attempt will leave many Republicans questioning their party loyalty. 
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: sidd on January 06, 2021, 08:12:06 AM
Well, you got Manchin to do the lieberman shuffle ...

sidd

Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: John Palmer. on January 06, 2021, 04:40:34 PM
Progressive representatives (Squad, Justice Dems,...) now have the golden opportunity to exert a positive influence toward the Left reaching up to the President, at least for the next two years.

With much less obstacle in the Senate, and a small margin in favor of Dems in Congress, their votes have never been so important. Will they use them for the People as they claim? Will they make the Dems as uncomfortable as AOC claims?

People should be very vigilant of what each Rep and Senator votes, and which law the President passes or vetoes. Unfortunately the MSM is not reliable for this important follow-up. The Corporate-owned MSM is Fake News made for the common interests of the State, the Military Industry, the Health Industry, Silicon Valley and Wall Street.

We live in truly tyrannical years...
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: SteveMDFP on January 06, 2021, 04:51:27 PM
Progressive representatives (Squad, Justice Dems,...) now have the golden opportunity to exert a positive influence toward the Left reaching up to the President, at least for the next two years.
 
With much less obstacle in the Senate, and a small margin in favor of Dems in Congress, their votes have never been so important. Will they use them for the People as they claim? Will they make the Dems as uncomfortable as AOC claims?

I think this is not plausible.  The Democratic party has a number of "blue dogs," who are much more conservative than most Democrats.  These handful, voting alongside Republicans, wield a functional veto against notably progressive legislation.  There is no way around this obstacle to legislation for the next 2 (and likely 4) years. 

Reinstating the practice of earmarks may alleviate this obstacle to a modest degree.  That strategy comes with its own downsides.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: John Palmer. on January 06, 2021, 05:22:50 PM
Progressive representatives (Squad, Justice Dems,...) now have the golden opportunity to exert a positive influence toward the Left reaching up to the President, at least for the next two years.
 
With much less obstacle in the Senate, and a small margin in favor of Dems in Congress, their votes have never been so important. Will they use them for the People as they claim? Will they make the Dems as uncomfortable as AOC claims?

I think this is not plausible.  The Democratic party has a number of "blue dogs," who are much more conservative than most Democrats.  These handful, voting alongside Republicans, wield a functional veto against notably progressive legislation.  There is no way around this obstacle to legislation for the next 2 (and likely 4) years. 

Reinstating the practice of earmarks may alleviate this obstacle to a modest degree.  That strategy comes with its own downsides.


Yes, I’m just echoing what AOC has been telling us is going to do, and she does have an opportunity to be way more relevant.

If there’s resignation in that the centrists are going to dominate, we may merge the “Biden Presidency” thread with the “Trump’s presidency thread” because, as Biden promised to rich donors in early 2020, “Nothing is going to fundamentally change”.

Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 06, 2021, 06:33:06 PM
I won't link to any more articles there, but it is funny that American Thinker is suffering Biden Derangement Syndrome over a moderate Democrat while, back in 2008 and 2012, the mulatto and arguably far more Leftist Obama was accepted as the winner (not that they were happy about it).
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on January 06, 2021, 07:25:09 PM
I agree with Steve.  The razor slim majority in Congress means that legislation has to be palpable to conservative legislators also.  The Democratic Party is not a United front, as we saw in the primaries.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: be cause on January 06, 2021, 09:01:37 PM
we need a democracy for Biden to become president .. there may not be one readily available .
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: SteveMDFP on January 06, 2021, 09:09:51 PM
we need a democracy for Biden to become president .. there may not be one readily available .

If Congress is unable to certify the electors' votes, Trump still ends his term at noon on Jan 20.  In this scenario, the Speaker of the House is the Constitutional President. 

Of course, the current President might declare a suspension of the Constitution, which he does not have the authority to do.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 06, 2021, 09:47:52 PM
Quote
Of course, the current President might declare a suspension of the Constitution, which he does not have the authority to do.
But will that stop Trump?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: sidd on January 07, 2021, 12:29:41 AM
Bellum sine fine: Nuland back in.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-biden-diplomats/biden-to-name-sherman-nuland-to-top-diplomatic-posts-politico-idUSKBN29A27G

Fuck the EU, i guess.

sidd
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Freegrass on January 07, 2021, 03:44:09 AM
Angry Republican leaders float removing Trump from office

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/06/politics/trump-capitol-impeachment-25-amendment/index.html?utm_term=link&utm_content=2021-01-07T02%3A38%3A06&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twCNNi

Washington (CNN)After violent pro-Trump protesters stormed the US Capitol on Wednesday, a growing number of Republican leaders told CNN that they believe Donald Trump should be removed from office before January 20. Four of them called for the 25th Amendment to be invoked, and two others said the President should be impeached.

"He has to be impeached and removed," said one current Republican elected official.
A former senior official said the President's actions were egregious enough to remove him even with such a short time left in his tenure.
"I think this has been a huge shock to the system," said the former official. "How do you keep him in place for two weeks after this?"
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: sidd on January 13, 2021, 08:10:25 AM
War without end, redux:

Crosse at wsws on Burns for CIA: A man of experience, for a taste, here he is on Libya's descent into slavery:

“It was right to act in Libya in the way that we did”

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/01/12/brns-j12.html

Sjursen at antiwar: Sherman and Nuland as "steady hands, experienced presiders over perennial war"

https://original.antiwar.com/Danny_Sjursen/2021/01/07/the-neocon-empire-strikes-back-victoria-nuland-and-the-kagans-who-love-her/

sidd

Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: FrostKing70 on January 13, 2021, 06:42:37 PM
Soon Trump will probably become the first US President to be impeached twice.

FBI is warning of more violence being planned on line for this weekend and leading up to inauguration.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on January 14, 2021, 03:44:57 AM
Soon Trump will probably become the first US President to be impeached twice.

FBI is warning of more violence being planned on line for this weekend and leading up to inauguration.
the 20,000 national guardsmen in DC with more in reserve should keep things from getting too out of control. They are also discouraging people from coming to DC until after the inauguration. Its all just words when commoners have problems but when royalty gets the shit scarred out of them they do something about it. It pisses me off how close we came to a dictatorship.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on January 14, 2021, 01:47:23 PM

the 20,000 national guardsmen in DC with more in reserve should keep things from getting too out of control. They are also discouraging people from coming to DC until after the inauguration. Its all just words when commoners have problems but when royalty gets the shit scarred out of them they do something about it. It pisses me off how close we came to a dictatorship.
The bad guys win.
That which was a free space for all is now gated and fenced.
Those who presume to govern us are no longer accessible to us.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: FrostKing70 on January 14, 2021, 05:49:04 PM
Another scary fact from history:

Hitler and the Nazi party attempted a coup in 1923, which little to no consequence.   In 1933, he rose to power.

Reminds me of "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it".
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 14, 2021, 07:30:59 PM
I don't think Trump can rise to power ten years from now, FrostKing70...he's too old. The one we have to look out for is some Joe Shmoe character who is a Governor or Senator, or maybe even less known personage, who will rise to power as the 99% get poorer and more desperate.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on January 15, 2021, 05:32:42 PM
Another scary fact from history:

Hitler and the Nazi party attempted a coup in 1923, which little to no consequence.   In 1933, he rose to power.

Reminds me of "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it".


Germany was mired in prolonged economic despair.  While most of the western countries were enjoying the roaring 20s, Germany was mired in a hyperinflationary economy.  The treaty of Versailles demanded monetary reparations from Germany.  Germany started paying this debts in 1920, but by 1923 was falling behind.  To compensate for the lack of payment, a combined French-Belgium military occupied the Ruhr valley industrial region.  This lead to Germany falling further behind in its debts.  To pay these mounting debts, Germany began printing money uncontrollably.  During 1923, the price of a loaf of bread ballooned from 250 marks to 200 trillion, as the mark was not tied to any hard asset.  To curtail inflation and stabilize its currency, the government issued a new currency (the Reichsmark) in 1924, and started borrowing money from the U.S. to back the currency.  That worked well until the crash of 1929.  The U.S. began to recall the loans, and many German businesses folded, resulting in skyrocketing unemployment, reaching 40% by 1933.  The people had reached a breaking point.  More than a decade of economic despair left the people ready to try anything, and the Nazi party filled the bill. 

Perhaps a dozen from now, if the situation in the U.S. mirrors Germany in the 1920s and 30s, a similar result could happen.  However, Trump would be 86 (if he is still alive).  Hitler was half that.





Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: karl dubhe2 on January 17, 2021, 01:30:39 AM
Another scary fact from history:

Hitler and the Nazi party attempted a coup in 1923, which little to no consequence.   In 1933, he rose to power.




Germany was [clipped  ;D]
Perhaps a dozen from now, if the situation in the U.S. mirrors Germany in the 1920s and 30s, a similar result could happen.  However, Trump would be 86 (if he is still alive).  Hitler was half that.




History is one of those things that echoes, maybe rhymes at times.    I think most history people would argue that Trump just showed the way to "how IT could be done."  Although, that's probably not going to 'work' the next time someone tries the same thing; especially as Trump continues to perform as expected.   There's still a bit of a chance that some demagogue will try the same thing, but if the consequences from the failed coup are severe the risk will be lower.   (according to my irrelevant opinion)

One could also compare the issues that the USA faces to the ones that existed after their Civil War.    These days the plantation owners are the owners of the large corporations that keep a lot of people as 'wage slaves'.   There's got to be room in the economy for what Lincoln called 'Free Labour' otherwise our corporate overlords could revert to some nasty old ways.   Reconstruction after the Civil War was interrupted, unlike the de-Nazification of Germany.

2021 should be much better than 2020.   
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: sidd on January 18, 2021, 07:28:43 AM
Some good news: Sherrod Brown chairs the banking committee and Bernie Sanders the Budget committee in the senate. Wall Street dont like that one bit.

What's Elizabeth Warren up to ? I think she should remain in the senate on a committee with teeth, like the two above.

sidd
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: ArgonneForest on January 19, 2021, 04:01:28 AM
Would it kill you guys to focus on solutions and what can be achieved rather than indulge in the US becoming a dictatorship or lamenting what could be? I don't think that's too much to ask. The rampant negativity on this thread isn't helpful
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: sidd on January 19, 2021, 06:50:51 AM
?

I thought sherrod as senate banking chair and bernie same on budget is good news. Unless, of course, i were part of the banking mafia.

sidd
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: ArgonneForest on January 19, 2021, 05:38:52 PM
It is good news, but you guys seem to be forgetting reconciliation in the Senate. Also, the idea that conservative Dems along with Repubs in the Senate will curtail climate legislation is unfounded. The only Senate Dem who would do that is Manchin, and he'll go along with most of what Dems want as long as West Virginia gets a piece of the pie
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on January 19, 2021, 10:24:29 PM
mitch mconnell: Capitol hill mob was 'provoked' by trump


See trump it sucks to be thrown in front of a bus by your allies. It is not like you came up with the idea but most people are more strategic about it. mconnell waited until you were no longer usefull to him instead of letting his ego make the decision. Hope to see you in prison soon.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on January 19, 2021, 10:56:29 PM
It is good news, but you guys seem to be forgetting reconciliation in the Senate. Also, the idea that conservative Dems along with Repubs in the Senate will curtail climate legislation is unfounded. The only Senate Dem who would do that is Manchin, and he'll go along with most of what Dems want as long as West Virginia gets a piece of the pie

During the vote on the new green deal, two other democrats voted with the Republicans, Angus King and Krysten Sinema.  The rest of the Democrats voted present to avoid an awkward confrontation.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on January 19, 2021, 11:35:36 PM
Joe is getting off to a good start.  The inaugural vigil was inspiring.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: ArgonneForest on January 20, 2021, 01:45:54 AM
As do I
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 20, 2021, 02:43:17 PM
Despair, depression, and the inevitable rise of Trump 2.0: Glenn Greenwald tells RT his Biden administration predictions
https://www.rt.com/usa/512749-greenwald-biden-elections-prediction/
Quote
“It’s not a coincidence that after eight years of Obama and Biden, we got Donald Trump,” he said. “Obviously, if you go back and do exactly the same thing that the ‘Obiden’ administration did for 8 years, which is what Biden’s preparing to do, any rational person has to expect the same outcome.”

On the other hand, if Joe learns from the last dozen years...
Four rules that should guide Bidenomics
https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/four-rules-that-should-guide-bidenomics/
Quote
Rule No. 1: Don’t doubt the power of government to help.
Rule No. 2: Don’t obsess about debt.
Rule No. 3: Don’t worry about inflation.
Rule No. 4: Don’t count on Republicans to help govern.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on January 20, 2021, 02:44:15 PM
A view from AussieLand

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/20/we-made-it-happy-united-states-presidential-inauguration-day-everyone
We made it! Happy United States presidential inauguration day everyone!
First Dog on the Moon


Click for larger & easier to read images
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: ArgonneForest on January 20, 2021, 02:52:56 PM
A really dumb comic strip. Biden isn't a tool of the so-called military-industrial complex, and he actually does give a damn about climate change. Whoever wrote this junk would know that if they bothered to look at his climate plan.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Freegrass on January 20, 2021, 06:27:24 PM
Amanda Gorman was AWESOME!!!! 🙂

https://youtu.be/cNFAICB8vxw
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: be cause on January 20, 2021, 06:29:00 PM
what a joy to listen to America's poet laurate , Amanda Gorman . b.c.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on January 20, 2021, 10:27:51 PM
A really dumb comic strip. Biden isn't a tool of the so-called military-industrial complex, and he actually does give a damn about climate change. Whoever wrote this junk would know that if they bothered to look at his climate plan.
It is cerainly true that the term "military-industrial complex" is somewhat last century (warning by Eisenhower at the end of his Presidency).

The military-industrial complex is very much a junior partner these days.
It has been replaced mostly by Wall Street / Financial Institutions and now also by Big-Tech (though they may have blown it).

It is also certainly true that Biden is a Corporate Democrat to the core. I was interested to note that Amazon was one of the corporate donors invited to the inauguration. (Were any ordinary members of the public invited?)

The smart Wall Street money has clocked that the real money is to be made in the new industries linked to climate change. Fossil fuel companies and legacy automakers are already feeling the chill. Hence a bold climate change plan is pushing at an open door. Though will that just be promoting renewables + EVs, or will it include actively erecting obstacles to fossil fuel investments?

The smart Wall Street money also knows it needs internationalism - including smart immigrants. Though that internationalism is likely to be limited as it seems many Democrats and Republicans share various shades of protectionism.

The real test will be doing something about economic / education / housing etc etc inequality. Infrastructure spending - no problem $$$.

A more progressive taxation regime? Now we are talking hardball.

I hope Biden gets much of his agenda through. Though if he does I will be jealous as our idiot Boris leads us into permanent decline on this side of the pond.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: ArgonneForest on January 20, 2021, 10:31:26 PM
A really dumb comic strip. Biden isn't a tool of the so-called military-industrial complex, and he actually does give a damn about climate change. Whoever wrote this junk would know that if they bothered to look at his climate plan.
It is cerainly true that the term "military-industrial complex" is somewhat last century (warning by Eisenhower at the end of his Presidency).

The military-industrial complex is very much a junior partner these days.
It has been replaced mostly by Wall Street / Financial Institutions and now also by Big-Tech (though they may have blown it).

It is also certainly true that Biden is a Corporate Democrat to the core. I was interested to note that Amazon was one of the corporate donors invited to the inauguration. (Were any ordinary members of the public invited?)

The smart Wall Street money has clocked that the real money is to be made in the new industries linked to climate change. Fossil fuel companies and legacy automakers are already feeling the chill. Hence a bold climate change plan is pushing at an open door. Though will that just be promoting renewables + EVs, or will it include actively erecting obstacles to fossil fuel investments?

The smart Wall Street money also knows it needs internationalism - including smart immigrants. Though that internationalism is likely to be limited as it seems many Democrats and Republicans share various shades of protectionism.

The real test will be doing something about economic / education / housing etc etc inequality. Infrastructure spending - no problem $$$.

A more progressive taxation regime? Now we are talking hardball.

I hope Biden gets much of his agenda through. Though if he does I will be jealous as our idiot Boris leads us into permanent decline on this side of the pond.

An excellent analysis
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on January 20, 2021, 11:20:36 PM
His comments on not banning fracking answer that question. IMO oil dies mostly from a reduction in demand not from a drop in supply. The US needs a regulatory frame work that punishes legacy automakers for not selling an increasing fraction of fully electric cars. 10% this year 20% next year etc.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: sidd on January 21, 2021, 12:30:04 AM
Two good things: Biden extends eviction moratorium unti March, pause on (federal) student loan payments until September.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/21/joe-biden-executive-action-blitz-day-one-460587

buncha other stuff in there too. Those caught my eye because i really hate to see people getting thrown out midwinter. And student loan terms are obscene to begin with.

sidd
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on January 21, 2021, 04:25:03 AM
His comments on not banning fracking answer that question. IMO oil dies mostly from a reduction in demand not from a drop in supply. The US needs a regulatory frame work that punishes legacy automakers for not selling an increasing fraction of fully electric cars. 10% this year 20% next year etc.

In order for automakers to sell more electric vehicles, there needs to be more buyers.  Similar to your supply and demand for oil.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on January 21, 2021, 04:26:37 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-55744470
Tom Hanks hosts star-studded concert for Joe Biden's inauguration
Others suggested a prediction previously made on The Simpsons, that Hanks would address the nation during a moment of "national chaos", had now come true.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EsOM6uUU0AIW4o4?format=jpg&name=small)

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/13218/production/_116606387_katyperrygetty.jpg)
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: be cause on January 22, 2021, 11:17:46 AM
looks like Joe has done more work in 2 days than donald did in 2 years . To restore some balance he needs to go golfing for the next 9 months ... b.c.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 22, 2021, 03:02:28 PM
Our First Anti-Catholic “Catholic” President
https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2021/01/22/our-first-anti-catholic-catholic-president/
Quote
Cupich’s criticisms of his fellow bishops are themselves also quite unprecedented. Then again, the thing that’s most “unprecedented” – that’s given rise to these recent in-house Catholic squabbles – is the election of a self-described “Catholic” president, who not only believes personally that abortion, gay “marriage” (he performed one as vice-president), transgenderism (“the civil rights issue of our time”), and much more are matters of overriding political urgency, despite the long teachings of the Church and American history. He’s determined – actually seems to be going out of his way – to impose those views. On all of us.
Biden is perfectly free to advocate his views. But since they contradicy Catholic doctrine he should not call himself Catholic. If you don't believe what the Church teaches, just be honest and leave the Church! That's perfectly legal.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: be cause on January 22, 2021, 04:22:53 PM
Tom , are you really so stuck on dogma that you preferred a mad dog to a Christian and now complain that you have a catholic President who puts his Christianity first ?
  'Love one-another ' is the over-riding direction of Jesus . He also said 'judge not .. ' . To find fault in those seeking to express their lives differently to you is simply un-Christian , no matter how 'catholic' your tastes . b.c.
 
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: SteveMDFP on January 22, 2021, 04:49:06 PM
Biden is perfectly free to advocate his views. But since they contradicy Catholic doctrine he should not call himself Catholic. If you don't believe what the Church teaches, just be honest and leave the Church! That's perfectly legal.
Not at all.  There is no contradiction with any religion to expect government to be secular.  No need to deprive, e.g., transgender people of their rights, or deny women their reproductive rights, just because some religions would see their conduct as "sinful."  A secular government is the best way to protect religious freedom of individuals.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 22, 2021, 06:53:35 PM
Biden is perfectly free to deny Catholic Dogma. But then he should not call himself Catholic. If you wear the mantle of Catholicism, believe and practice what the RCC teaches. You can't have it both ways.

                                __________________________________

.. Tom .. I cannot allow you to argue the case for Catholic dogma against Christianity here . We can leave it to the pope to take up the mantle of your argument . I'm sure they will be meeting in the next year or two ; (although the pope has certainly indicated he believes you can 'have it both ways'). As 'thecatholicthing' describes it , it is an 'in-house catholic squabble' .  b.c.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on January 22, 2021, 10:16:42 PM
Biden has taken an oath to defemd to the best of his ability the US Constitution.

The US Constitution has embedded within it the separation of Church and State and the rejection of rule by Kings. Much of that came from political thought influenced by events in France where the people were oppressed by the Monarchy and nobility with the total support of the Catholic Church (until 1789)

Biden is bound by his oath of office to refuse to limit by decree the rights of the people or impose laws demanded by the evangelical christians amongst many others. It is a great pity that the following is now embedded in the US psyche.

Quote
" In God We Trust " is the official motto of the United States of America and of the U.S. state of Florida. It was adopted by the U.S. Congress in 1956, supplanting E pluribus unum, which had been in use since the initial 1776 design of the Great Seal of the United States.

It seems to me that Biden is right to be trying a bit more of "E pluribus unum" as opposed to Trump's totally hypocritical "In God We Trust".


Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: wili on January 22, 2021, 10:59:53 PM
Biden...ah, a Christian who actually goes to Church! And hasn't had multiple divorces. Hmmm

geront, that 'God' language came in at about the same time as 'under God' was introduced into the pledge of allegiance that all kids were forced to say every day at school. They were both part of the red scare hysteria, seen as a way to weed out 'godless commies.'

We would be a much better (and frankly more truly Christian) nation if we had allowed more Communists and Socialist into policy making decisions and into the national dialogue during these years.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: vox_mundi on January 22, 2021, 11:24:52 PM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/0f/e2/ca/0fe2ca5573f37515a9b3724c5a1d79dd.gif)

(https://i0.wp.com/www.dailycartoonist.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/non_sequitur_april_28_2017.gif)
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: zenith on January 25, 2021, 03:07:43 PM
Ranking the Most Influential Democratic Donors in the 2020 Race
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/08/most-influential-democratic-donors-2020-elections.html

follow the money.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: zenith on January 25, 2021, 03:54:09 PM
Israel will be happy. They called Trump King Cyrus, Biden has be called Moses.
https://www.jns.org/opinion/its-time-to-stop-counting-jews-in-the-cabinet/
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: zenith on January 25, 2021, 04:16:31 PM
Biden hasn't wasted any time.
https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/middle-east/1611293792-us-military-convoy-enters-northeast-syria-report

According to the report, the troops are set to deploy on the nearby oilfields, with Kurdish-controlled eastern Syria rich in energy resources.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on January 25, 2021, 06:10:57 PM
Ranking the Most Influential Democratic Donors in the 2020 Race
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/08/most-influential-democratic-donors-2020-elections.html

follow the money.

Somewhat amazing how more billionaires are contributing to Democratic candidates than Republican.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on January 28, 2021, 04:05:25 PM
https://www.miningweekly.com/article/coal-wins-curious-reprieve-in-bidens-assault-on-climate-change-2021-01-28/rep_id:3650

Coal wins curious reprieve in Biden’s assault on climate change
(https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0000920544_resized_steamrisesfrompileofcoalinwestvirginia2018reuters1022.jpg)
Quote
President Joe Biden enlisted the entire US government in the fight against climate change on Wednesday, even telling the Central Intelligence Agency to consider global warming a national security threat.

Yet he left out coal -- the fossil fuel most widely blamed for global warming -- when he froze the sale of leases to extract oil and gas from federal land.

It was a conspicuous omission for a president who has vowed to make the electric grid carbon-free by 2035 and who has said the world’s “future rests in renewable energy.”

“This order should have included all fossil fuel extraction on public lands,” said Mitch Jones, policy director at the environmental group Food and Water Watch, who called the decision to leave out coal both “a disappointment” and “scientifically unsound". “For years we’ve been force fed the false idea that fracked gas -- fracked methane -- is cleaner than coal, but, now, coal gets a pass?” Jones said. “The fight against climate change demands that we remain vigilant against all fossil fuel extraction.”

White House national climate adviser Gina McCarthy said coal leasing will still get a review as part of a broad analysis of fossil-fuel leasing. But unlike oil and gas development on federal land, which Biden promised to target when running for president, a pause on selling coal rights “was not part of the commitments on the campaign.”

Administration officials had planned to include coal in the order but the decision was made to leave it off the list by Monday afternoon, according to three people familiar with the matter who asked not to be named describing internal deliberations.

One factor in the White House’s decision was how it would affect litigation over then-President Donald Trump’s reversal of an earlier Obama-era moratorium. Conservation groups and Native Americans last year filed a fresh challenge of the Trump administration’s coal leasing restart, arguing the government did not sufficiently evaluate the environmental harm of the move. That case is still pending before a federal district court in Montana.

It’s not clear that a coal directive from the White House would have interfered with the ongoing litigation. And while federal coal sales have waned along with demand for the fossil fuel, the government has continued issuing new and modified leases, said Earthjustice attorney Jenny Harbine.

“It’s really important that this administration stop issuing leases that allow for infrastructure commitments for the next 20 years on federal coal when it’s completely avoidable and completely unnecessary,” Harbine said.

Coal is politically treacherous terrain. Just ask former President Barack Obama, who for years was accused of leading a “war on coal” by advancing policies limiting mining techniques and power-plant pollution.

Trump used that claim on the campaign trail in 2016, highlighting miners in hardhats at his rallies and even pantomiming shoveling it out on stage. The appeal helped him notch big wins in the once reliably Democratic state of West Virginia.

Biden has largely avoided explicit talk about his plans for coal, though he’s repeatedly promised that a wave of clean energy investment can put people to work in high-paying, union jobs installing wind turbines and solar panels.

On Wednesday, Biden emphasized he would seek to “revitalize the economies of coal, oil and gas and power plant communities,” starting by creating jobs reclaiming old mines and revitalizing once-polluted sites.

Coal and its workforce have politically powerful champions, including Senator Joe Manchin, the Democrat from West Virginia, now leading the Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

Manchin said he expected Biden to keep his pledge to protect the jobs of workers displaced by the shift in energy sources.

“I intend to hold the administration to this while ensuring that the burden of any acceleration in already changing markets is not unduly placed on these communities that powered our nation to greatness,” Manchin said in an emailed statement.

Biden ordered the creation of an interagency working group focused on the coordinating investments and other efforts to assist communities tied to coal, oil and natural gas.

“We’re never going to forget the men and women who dug the coal and built the nation,” Biden vowed. “We’re going to do right by them -- make sure they have opportunities to keep building the nation and their own communities and getting paid well for it.”
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on January 28, 2021, 08:37:40 PM
https://www.miningweekly.com/article/coal-wins-curious-reprieve-in-bidens-assault-on-climate-change-2021-01-28/rep_id:3650

Coal wins curious reprieve in Biden’s assault on climate change
President Joe Biden enlisted the entire US government in the fight against climate change on Wednesday, even telling the Central Intelligence Agency to consider global warming a national security threat.

Yet he left out coal -- the fossil fuel most widely blamed for global warming -- when he froze the sale of leases to extract oil and gas from federal land.



And fracking.
This one from the State Official Bulletin no less:

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/27/business/fracking-ban-biden-federal-leasing/index.html

Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: zufall on January 29, 2021, 12:07:28 PM
    Joe Biden just now in his remarks on climate change:

    "We're not going to ban fracking" pic.twitter.com/9JcFjTTjzv

    — jordan (@JordanUhl) January 27, 2021
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: P-maker on January 29, 2021, 01:05:10 PM
Zufall,

Fracking for optimal geothermal outputs may be what is on his mind...
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on January 29, 2021, 05:08:49 PM
Zufall,

Fracking for optimal geothermal outputs may be what is on his mind...
Or maybe Biden's mind is on the 2022 mid-term elections? Remember the Democrat results down-ballot did not live up to the hype in November. Republicans could easily get the House back. Lose the House and his presidency will only have one year max to make a big difference.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on January 29, 2021, 05:32:03 PM
Zufall,

Fracking for optimal geothermal outputs may be what is on his mind...
Or maybe Biden's mind is on the 2022 mid-term elections? Remember the Democrat results down-ballot did not live up to the hype in November. Republicans could easily get the House back. Lose the House and his presidency will only have one year max to make a big difference.

I suspect you are correct here.  Move too far left, and he risks losing enough voters to swing control.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Sciguy on February 03, 2021, 01:16:21 AM
President Biden has been acting on climate change much more quickly and aggressively than expected.

[url][https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55872331/url]

Quote
Biden's climate agenda: Is this the beginning of the end for fossil fuels?

Justin Rowlatt
Chief environment correspondent
31/1/2021

Fossil fuels have been the bedrock of US prosperity for more than a century.

The country's economy, security and society depend on them.

But in the few days since his inauguration, the new American president has gone to war against coal, oil and natural gas with a decisiveness that has caught everyone by surprise.

Quote
In the handful of days the new president has been in office, he has already exceeded expectations.

    We knew he was going to re-join the Paris climate accord, we didn't know that a few days later he'd order his domestic climate "tzar", Gina McCarthy, to draw up plans to commit the US to "the most aggressive" carbon cut possible.
    We expected him to try and kill the giant Keystone XL oil pipeline, but not that he'd pull the permit on his first day in office, stopping the 2,000km pipeline project dead in its tracks.
    We knew he planned to make climate change a priority in policy-making, but not that he'd order the Pentagon to make it an issue of national security.
    It is part of what is being called a "whole government" approach to the issue.

Quote
He believes the flurry of executive orders is designed to make an important point.

The president wants to send "a decisive signal about the end of one epoch and the beginning of another," says Mr McKibben.

That signal is aimed at investors, he says. "Fossil fuel, Biden is making clear, is not a safe bet, or even a good bet, for making real money."

Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: sidd on March 04, 2021, 03:50:55 AM
From America's Finest News Source: Joe Biden doing good

"this was one of the good Syrian airstrikes"

"these are the sorts of bombing raids we’re supposed to be doing"

"It’s like when Obama did it, okay? "

https://local.theonion.com/democrat-reassures-friend-this-one-of-the-good-syrian-a-1846366749

sidd
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on March 04, 2021, 02:42:23 PM
From America's Finest News Source: Joe Biden doing good

"this was one of the good Syrian airstrikes"

"these are the sorts of bombing raids we’re supposed to be doing"

"It’s like when Obama did it, okay? "

https://local.theonion.com/democrat-reassures-friend-this-one-of-the-good-syrian-a-1846366749

sidd

IDK.  Whenever a Democrat does it, the more liberal sites call it good, and the more conservative sites blast it.  It is the opposite whenever a Republican does it. 
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: LeftyLarry on March 04, 2021, 11:06:47 PM
Zufall,

Fracking for optimal geothermal outputs may be what is on his mind...
Or maybe Biden's mind is on the 2022 mid-term elections? Remember the Democrat results down-ballot did not live up to the hype in November. Republicans could easily get the House back. Lose the House and his presidency will only have one year max to make a big difference.

I suspect you are correct here.  Move too far left, and he risks losing enough voters to swing control.

I think losing  2022  election control of Congress, at least from my sources in politics tell me is highly probable.

Republicans did very well in state legislatures last election and redistricting is on their agendas and is happening.

Things like going back in the Paris accords that make the “declining, indebited “ US pay energy credits costing more jobs ,for the next 10 years while wealthy China continues to get a freebie and an unfair advantage, is not going unnoticed .
instead of negotiating for a fair environmental deal or a better Iran Nuke deal, he just gave  china and the Europeans whatever  they wanted.
That’s how Trump was elected in the first place.
This isn’t going unnoticed.
Today he took away the  Covid-19 checks in his bill that were going to the middle class people swing votes who voted against Trump in the last election, the Soccer Moms , who are also pissed he’s supporting Trans  ( former men) playing sports against their daughters.

 The Dems will now try to push through whatever they can, as fast as they can, because they know the second part of his term will be very different.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on March 07, 2021, 12:16:27 PM
My comment on the Trump Presidency thread, why that thread survives open on his Forum is not well understood except for giving some neolibs an outlet to continue with their stupid obsession on Trump instead of paying attention on the horrendous record that the current president is accumulating in a very short period of time. You know, Trump is fun and for some it is a drug difficult to quit.

Biden: best not mention the over fifty million affected due to our failure on pressing harder and passing the $15 minimum wage while we were obsessed over Neera Tanden
Kamala: hear hear

Because Biden looks more and more like Trump, at least in the number of lies accumulating ($2000 right  at your door on Jan 20 was a dirty lie, border immigration policy NOT discontinued including keeping children detained, $15 minimum wage not strongly pushed, sanctions to Saudi MBS forgiven/forgotten and more), Biden is a very callous LIAR. And while lying, let’s bomb a country just to remind the world that we won’t stop the infinite wars... our industry has a stockpile to distribute. And in the meantime let’s cancel everything that bothers us, right and left, with the help of our Silicon Valley friends.

In fact, Trump never was as powerful as how this administration is shaping up to become.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on March 07, 2021, 01:25:26 PM
My comment on the Trump Presidency thread, why that thread survives open on his Forum is not well understood except for giving some neolibs an outlet to continue with their stupid obsession on Trump instead of paying attention on the horrendous record that the current president is accumulating in a very short period of time. You know, Trump is fun and for some it is a drug difficult to quit.

Biden: best not mention the over fifty million affected due to our failure on pressing harder and passing the $15 minimum wage while we were obsessed over Neera Tanden
Kamala: hear hear

Because Biden looks more and more like Trump, at least in the number of lies accumulating ($2000 right  at your door on Jan 20 was a dirty lie, border immigration policy NOT discontinued including keeping children detained, $15 minimum wage not strongly pushed, sanctions to Saudi MBS forgiven/forgotten and more), Biden is a very callous LIAR. And while lying, let’s bomb a country just to remind the world that we won’t stop the infinite wars... our industry has a stockpile to distribute. And in the meantime let’s cancel everything that bothers us, right and left, with the help of our Silicon Valley friends.

In fact, Trump never was as powerful as how this administration is shaping up to become.

IMI, the main difference between the two parties is that one will tell you when they are screwing the people, will the other lies about it, pretending to be helping.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Rodius on March 07, 2021, 11:36:58 PM
It really doesnt matter who holds political power in the USA because the same shit happens regardless..... the only real thing that changes is how they dress it up.

If you want real change, stop buying stuff, become a minimalist, drive less and ride a bike more, and buy local from small businesses.
Reduce and eliminate all debt and save your money, and don't invest in real estate or the stock market.
And move out of the cities.

Do those things and those super-rich and powerful men will struggle and fall from their fragile pedestal
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on March 08, 2021, 02:28:33 PM
With either party the rich still win but if you compare which states deploy renewable energy and which fight to keep fossil fuels it is almost entirely along party lines. With Texas being an anomaly.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on March 08, 2021, 02:48:16 PM
My comment on the Trump Presidency thread, why that thread survives open on his Forum is not well understood ........
That's because Trump is still the President. I know this is true 'cos Tucker Carlson said so and God would strike him down dead if he lied.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Rodius on March 08, 2021, 10:34:21 PM
With either party the rich still win but if you compare which states deploy renewable energy and which fight to keep fossil fuels it is almost entirely along party lines. With Texas being an anomaly.

Yep, but the cosmetics are relatively the same.... protect those who have the wealth and power.

The cosmetics are how the wealth is created remains the same. Fossil fuels or renewables are sort of irrelevant because both will maintain the wealth of whoever does it.

For example, regardless of how each state produces their energy, all states protect the wealth and provide benefits to the wealthy.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on March 08, 2021, 10:34:33 PM
Great summary by katie halper on Twitter: “Nothing will fundamentally change” is the only promise (made to rich donors) that so far Biden seems to be willing to keep.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: kassy on March 09, 2021, 02:36:27 PM
So how would you get things to fundamentally change?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on March 09, 2021, 02:42:32 PM
So how would you get things to fundamentally change?
You probably can't, realistically.  :'(
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on March 09, 2021, 10:21:38 PM
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Bidens-Energy-Secretary-To-Oil-Industry-Adapt-Or-Die.amp.html (https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Bidens-Energy-Secretary-To-Oil-Industry-Adapt-Or-Die.amp.html)
Bidens energy secretary to oil industry adapt or die
That is more like it.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on March 10, 2021, 07:35:05 PM
So how would you get things to fundamentally change?

The hell do you mean? So he tells to a bunch of millionaires that nothing will change as we’ll transition from the Trump years and that’s ok with you?

What about drastically higher taxes to wealthy folks and corporations, $15 min wage now, not in 2024, decent Healthcare for all like in Europe, break the vicious circle education costs <-> education debt like in Europe, reduce police pressure and simultaneously legislate to reform prison system, so that we can walk in the streets like in Europe, what about no children held in borders, what about his immigration reform on day 1 promise, what about the fucking $2000 on day 1 promise that he still owes me, what about no fracking, no coal, no bombing other countries...

Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on March 10, 2021, 08:45:46 PM
So how would you get things to fundamentally change?

The hell do you mean? So he tells to a bunch of millionaires that nothing will change as we’ll transition from the Trump years and that’s ok with you?

What about drastically higher taxes to wealthy folks and corporations, $15 min wage now, not in 2024, decent Healthcare for all like in Europe, break the vicious circle education costs <-> education debt like in Europe, reduce police pressure and simultaneously legislate to reform prison system, so that we can walk in the streets like in Europe, what about no children held in borders, what about his immigration reform on day 1 promise, what about the fucking $2000 on day 1 promise that he still owes me, what about no fracking, no coal, no bombing other countries...
Unfortunately the Senate is 50-50 and....

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/08/biden-manchin-presidency-power-democrats-congress
Joe Biden might be in the White House, but Joe Manchin runs the presidency

In US politics today, the conservative Democratic senator seems to have all the power and is more than happy to wield it
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/e973d1cc57586b076bf5d34f322a6a344f9bafb9/0_135_4073_2445/master/4073.jpg?width=620&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=e07482198c9c81820870cbcc28710696)
Quote
For the last week, Americans paying attention to politics have learned an important truth: Joe Biden may live in the White House, but the conservative Democratic senator Joe Manchin from West Virginia is effectively president. This depressing reality can certainly be fixed, but only if progressive Democrats in Congress are willing to actually change the dynamic – and they have a rare opportunity to do that right now by using their power to raise the minimum wage.

But so far, they aren’t choosing to use their power – which is a huge structural problem not just now, but also for the foreseeable future.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/17/joe-manchin-democrat-split-senate-leverage
Joe Manchin: the conservative Democrat with leverage in a split Senate

The three-term senator’s reputation as a right-leaning Democrat means his oppositon or support can slow down legislation or open a path to it becoming law
Quote
There’s a meme going around concerning Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia. It shows a futuristic city of gleaming skyscrapers and flying cars and an accompanying caption that reads something like: “West Virginia after Manchin has used all the leverage he has in the next Congress.”

In other words, people expect Manchin, one of the most conservative Democrats in the federal government, to wield power like never before thanks to the 50-50 split in the Senate left by Democrats’ double win in the Georgia runoff races.

Manchin, a three-term senator and former governor of West Virginia, is the most well-known of a set of moderate Republicans and Democrats who can decide whether to slow down legislation to a crawl or open a pathway to it becoming law.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: kassy on March 10, 2021, 09:37:45 PM
So how would you get things to fundamentally change?

The hell do you mean?

It is a question and one you need to get an answer to if you want even part of the wish list.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: oren on March 11, 2021, 01:32:43 AM
The problem is not with Biden but with the American voters (and rigged voting system). Even with Biden's centrist (=right wing) agenda he was barely elected, even when running against a proven egomaniacal liar.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on March 11, 2021, 03:57:28 AM
The problem is not with Biden but with the American voters (and rigged voting system). Even with Biden's centrist (=right wing) agenda he was barely elected, even when running against a proven egomaniacal liar.
Rigged voting system?  Now you are sounding like a Trumpite.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: sidd on March 11, 2021, 08:51:51 AM
(this is not from the onion)

--

@USATODAY Mar 9

Reporter: "We were promised a White House cat, what happened to that?"

Psaki: "Where is the cat? Today is a good day for the cat. I don't have any update on the cat. We know the cat will break the internet."

https://twitter.com/USATODAY/status/1369368524557348864?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

--

This is eerily reminiscent of a sequence in the movie, "Wag The Dog"

sidd
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on March 11, 2021, 11:23:46 AM
So how would you get things to fundamentally change?

The hell do you mean?

It is a question and one you need to get an answer to if you want even part of the wish list.

Right, I simply hope you find the fact that Biden said that as slightly problematic, or not very encouraging.

@gerontocrat Manchin is not that far from Biden in political inclinations, especially when it comes to austerity toward social policies.

anyway let’s wait a year and then we reconvene 😌

The problem is not with Biden but with the American voters (and rigged voting system). Even with Biden's centrist (=right wing) agenda he was barely elected, even when running against a proven egomaniacal liar.

He got the vote of many from the left and many from impoverished communities (record numbers in some cases) and he made very popular promises in times of the pandemic, knowing he’d get rid of Trump if he mobilized as many as he could. But as you say he is unfolding a centrist/right wing agenda, this is the true Biden.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on March 11, 2021, 12:55:39 PM
So how would you get things to fundamentally change?

The hell do you mean?

It is a question and one you need to get an answer to if you want even part of the wish list.

Right, I simply hope you find the fact that Biden said that as slightly problematic, or not very encouraging.

@gerontocrat Manchin is not that far from Biden in political inclinations, especially when it comes to austerity toward social policies.

anyway let’s wait a year and then we reconvene 😌

The problem is not with Biden but with the American voters (and rigged voting system). Even with Biden's centrist (=right wing) agenda he was barely elected, even when running against a proven egomaniacal liar.

He got the vote of many from the left and many from impoverished communities (record numbers in some cases) and he made very popular promises in times of the pandemic, knowing he’d get rid of Trump if he mobilized as many as he could. But as you say he is unfolding a centrist/right wing agenda, this is the true Biden.

This is the Biden that most people expected.  He has always been a centrist, ran has a centrist, and now people are complaining that he is acting like a centrist?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: LeftyLarry on March 11, 2021, 02:04:13 PM
So how would you get things to fundamentally change?

The hell do you mean?

It is a question and one you need to get an answer to if you want even part of the wish list.

Right, I simply hope you find the fact that Biden said that as slightly problematic, or not very encouraging.

@gerontocrat Manchin is not that far from Biden in political inclinations, especially when it comes to austerity toward social policies.

anyway let’s wait a year and then we reconvene 😌

The problem is not with Biden but with the American voters (and rigged voting system). Even with Biden's centrist (=right wing) agenda he was barely elected, even when running against a proven egomaniacal liar.

He got the vote of many from the left and many from impoverished communities (record numbers in some cases) and he made very popular promises in times of the pandemic, knowing he’d get rid of Trump if he mobilized as many as he could. But as you say he is unfolding a centrist/right wing agenda, this is the true Biden.

This is the Biden that most people expected.  He has always been a centrist, ran has a centrist, and now people are complaining that he is acting like a centrist?

The man has no voice, he’s the classic Leftwing puppet.He can’t even have a press conference because he’d make too many mistakes with a script.

So what do we have so far?

Printing more money for their clientele, keeping Americans from traveling, working and going to school while opening borders to people who could be bringing Covid with them and have no hope of getting a job but will be demanding welfare/ food stamps/ medical during a time where the deficit is growing astronomically.
Going back into the Paris accords a crazy agreement that allows China to keep on being #1 in greenhouse emissions through 2030 with no penalties  or changes while forcing  the US to reduce its emissions and pay energy credits which means less jobs and worse balance of payments while China has a party and the planet isn’t effected in any positive way.
https://www.usdebtclock.org/
Going back to the Universities to take away men’s rights in the he said/ she said rape cases, where rape is when a couple who has had sex maybe 20 times in the past suddenly has the women raped according to leftist law because she and her boyfriend went out drinking but this time she really didn’t want to have sex, maybe,  according to her lesbian advisor and the guy wanted to break up with her anyway so ruin his life and he must accept it.
Looking the other way while Free Speech continues to be eroded by Tech Giants, schools systems , press and anything the left has control of.
Yes, Biden is a great man, not the Political hack, swamp rat he always was, who sets his family members and cronies up to make big bucks off the rest of Americans backs.
 
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: NevB on March 11, 2021, 02:15:06 PM
The problem is not with Biden but with the American voters (and rigged voting system). Even with Biden's centrist (=right wing) agenda he was barely elected, even when running against a proven egomaniacal liar.
Rigged voting system?  Now you are sounding like a Trumpite.

Not rigged ?
(https://images.newrepublic.com/4fabc10d4172a933e66f7f5f221263ee2ebc7fc1.png?auto=compress&ar=3%3A2&fit=crop&crop=faces&q=65&fm=jpg&ixlib=react-9.0.2&w=1946)
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Memshin on March 11, 2021, 04:00:21 PM
Yes, rigged by extreme gerrymandering, also voter suppression laws. But mostly by the nature of the Senate and electoral college. Republicans won popular vote for president once in last thirty years but held the office almost half the time. The fifty republican senators, mostly from low population states, represent many fewer voters than the fifty democrats. So yes, rigged strongly in favor of republicans.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on March 11, 2021, 04:24:18 PM
The problem is not with Biden but with the American voters (and rigged voting system). Even with Biden's centrist (=right wing) agenda he was barely elected, even when running against a proven egomaniacal liar.
Rigged voting system?  Now you are sounding like a Trumpite.

Not rigged ?
(https://images.newrepublic.com/4fabc10d4172a933e66f7f5f221263ee2ebc7fc1.png?auto=compress&ar=3%3A2&fit=crop&crop=faces&q=65&fm=jpg&ixlib=react-9.0.2&w=1946)

That district was created in an attempt to increase Hispanic representation in Congress (many others were created to increase black representation).  The district is 64% Latino.  Not that it has helped any.  It has been held by an old white guy since its creation.  This is one of many gerrymandered districts (a process that dates to the early 19th century), but has absolutely no effect on presidential elections. 
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on March 11, 2021, 04:45:04 PM
Yes, rigged by extreme gerrymandering, also voter suppression laws. But mostly by the nature of the Senate and electoral college. Republicans won popular vote for president once in last thirty years but held the office almost half the time. The fifty republican senators, mostly from low population states, represent many fewer voters than the fifty democrats. So yes, rigged strongly in favor of republicans.

The bicameral system was created specifically for that reason; so that smaller states would have as much say as larger states.  You may call it rigged, but it is rigged in favor of the little guy.  Same with the electoral college. 

The House is based on population, so the larger states have a distinct advantage (California has 53x the population of Alaska, and has 53 seats compared to Alaska's 1).  Still, it has been fairly evenly divided.  Over the past three decades, both parties have won approximately 50% of the seats. 

I did not believe Trump, when he said it was rigged, and I see no reason to believe your claims.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: oren on March 11, 2021, 05:03:14 PM
Indeed.



 p.s from b.c. .. this was a response to Menshim's post ^^ rather than The Walrus .
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: I’M IN LOVE WITH A RAGER on March 11, 2021, 11:45:40 PM
In my opinion, the primary system itself is fundamentally flawed as it allows a pair of private companies (DNC and RNC) to quite heavy-handedly put their thumbs on the scales, and has been stated to be entirely permissible by party leadership. Nebulous circular arguments like "electability" often take precedence over desired policy changes, because playing the crooked game is the only way to win.

In our current system, the average American has a near-0% chance of running for office because the political elite in both parties have such a massive leg up in narrative and connections that they can snuff out all but the highest of the upper echelon just by entering the race. Most candidates win primaries by out-fundraising the competition, making back-room deals with each other, and strategically dropping out in coordinated maneuvers, rather than letting the American people organically decide which candidate has the best political goals and would represent their interests the most. How many wonderful potential representatives never even run because our system doesn't even provide a framework for them to have a fighting chance?

Why are all 50 primaries not held on the same day? Super Tuesday works completely fine, so we could have 100% of the delegates up for grabs on that day rather than just the majority. In combination with ranked choice voting, or with a built in runoff system on later dates, the electorate could keep and eliminate all candidates with their votes alone, rather than through the whims of donors and party string-pullers. I think this would result in a stronger consensus candidate for each party, rather than producing a strong party insider who barrels through the primary on corporate donations and media spin, but ends up weak and uninspiring in the general election.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on March 12, 2021, 03:16:05 PM
In my opinion, the primary system itself is fundamentally flawed as it allows a pair of private companies (DNC and RNC) to quite heavy-handedly put their thumbs on the scales, and has been stated to be entirely permissible by party leadership. Nebulous circular arguments like "electability" often take precedence over desired policy changes, because playing the crooked game is the only way to win.

In our current system, the average American has a near-0% chance of running for office because the political elite in both parties have such a massive leg up in narrative and connections that they can snuff out all but the highest of the upper echelon just by entering the race. Most candidates win primaries by out-fundraising the competition, making back-room deals with each other, and strategically dropping out in coordinated maneuvers, rather than letting the American people organically decide which candidate has the best political goals and would represent their interests the most. How many wonderful potential representatives never even run because our system doesn't even provide a framework for them to have a fighting chance?

Why are all 50 primaries not held on the same day? Super Tuesday works completely fine, so we could have 100% of the delegates up for grabs on that day rather than just the majority. In combination with ranked choice voting, or with a built in runoff system on later dates, the electorate could keep and eliminate all candidates with their votes alone, rather than through the whims of donors and party string-pullers. I think this would result in a stronger consensus candidate for each party, rather than producing a strong party insider who barrels through the primary on corporate donations and media spin, but ends up weak and uninspiring in the general election.

Yes, the two parties have worked hard to keep it a two-party system.  Effectively, eliminating all competition.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Memshin on March 12, 2021, 03:23:33 PM
Walrus - it is rigged in favor of of "the little guy" only if you think states are guys. But for the people in those states, if CA has 53x alaska's population, each person in alaska has 53 times the power to elect senators as each person in california. And about the same in electing presidents.
The founders of course didn't do this to advantage republicans, who didn't exist yet. It was partly a result of the history of the states as separate colonies. But it was partly to protect lower population slave states (mostly agricultural, and much of their population was slaves, each counted as only 3/5 of a person) against more densely populated 'free' states like new York.
In modern America, it is hard to see how it makes sense to empower states, as opposed to empowering people. And the current results of the founder's set-up is to strongly rig the Senate and presidency in favor of republicans.
In the house, democrats tends to get more total votes. It only has been relatively evenly divided because of gerrymandering.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on March 12, 2021, 07:26:31 PM
Walrus - it is rigged in favor of of "the little guy" only if you think states are guys. But for the people in those states, if CA has 53x alaska's population, each person in alaska has 53 times the power to elect senators as each person in california. And about the same in electing presidents.
The founders of course didn't do this to advantage republicans, who didn't exist yet. It was partly a result of the history of the states as separate colonies. But it was partly to protect lower population slave states (mostly agricultural, and much of their population was slaves, each counted as only 3/5 of a person) against more densely populated 'free' states like new York.
In modern America, it is hard to see how it makes sense to empower states, as opposed to empowering people. And the current results of the founder's set-up is to strongly rig the Senate and presidency in favor of republicans.
In the house, democrats tends to get more total votes. It only has been relatively evenly divided because of gerrymandering.

All you say can’t be truer.

It’s funny too how the Dems and their propaganda branches (MSNBC, CNN et al) reminded us day and night of the necessity to abolish or reform the electoral college when Clinton lost to Trump, while now this debate is completely abandoned except for a few souls of the Left (some socialists, abandoned Bernie followers, some libertarians...). Carter was the last one to agitate the issue while being in power. Do you imagine Biden bringing up a proposition to elect the President based on the popular vote, or to rebalance the number of senators accounting for state population to some degree?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on March 12, 2021, 09:21:41 PM
You should be honest enough with yourself to recognize that both sides use propaganda machines to spread their ideology. They both misrepresent things to win converts and push their agenda.                                                                                           
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on March 12, 2021, 09:25:17 PM
Walrus - it is rigged in favor of of "the little guy" only if you think states are guys. But for the people in those states, if CA has 53x alaska's population, each person in alaska has 53 times the power to elect senators as each person in california. And about the same in electing presidents.
 And the current results of the founder's set-up is to strongly rig the Senate and presidency in favor of republicans.
In the house, democrats tends to get more total votes. It only has been relatively evenly divided because of gerrymandering.

That is true for Senators, but not Congressmen or the President.  The Senate currently favors the GOP, but that was not true in the past.  50 years ago, the Democrats held a 10-seat advantage, due mainly to representation from smaller states.  The three largest states (NY, CA, and PA) all had 2 Republican Senators.  Was anyone complaining about rigging then?  No, that is just the way the pendulum swings. 

Last year in the House, the Democrats won 51.0% of the seats (221), with 50.8% of the votes.  The Republicans won 49.0% of the seats (213) with  47.7% of the vote.  Statistically, that is amazingly close.  Where is your evidence of rigging there?  There are very few districts that are gerrymandered to favor one party or the other - yes, both parties do it.  Since districts are redrawn with every census, whichever party controls the legislature in each state, has the upper hand in the redistricting.  Each party tries to tilt elections in their favor.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on March 12, 2021, 10:27:36 PM
You should be honest enough with yourself to recognize that both sides use propaganda machines to spread their ideology. They both misrepresent things to win converts and push their agenda.                                                                                           

There are no sides, that is the problem. No-one represents you.
Elon? Well represented.
Jeff? Well represented.
Mark? Well represented.
The Waltons? Well represented
The armament companies? Well represented
The pharma industry? Well represented
Health insurance folks? Well represented
Private prison system folks? Well represented
Oil & Coal industry? Well represented

You? You are a fucking pariah
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on March 13, 2021, 08:23:47 PM
nadir your comment seemed to be attacking only dems i was just saying repub do same thing. generally yes the deck is stacked against regular people who are not rich.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on March 14, 2021, 12:55:29 AM
This news is not from 2017. This is from yesterday.

https://apnews.com/article/immigration-coronavirus-pandemic-border-patrols-texas-9b959d739d59f03dd5873927171f2e29?utm_medium=AP&utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter

I remember Biden promising to end this as soon as he’d get into the WH.

This started with him as VP, btw.

President Joe Biden’s administration denied the lawyers access to the tent facility. During the administration of former President Donald Trump, attorney visits to Border Patrol stations revealed severe problems, including dozens of children held at one rural station without adequate food, water, or soap.


From Sep 2020 DNC :

The former vice president has an exhaustive to-do list. Within his first 100 days, Biden says he would implement a wide range of policies: not another mile of border wall, no more separating families, no more prolonged detentions or deportations of peaceable, hardworking migrants.

Biden also says he would restore the asylum system and support alternatives to immigrant detention, such as case management, that allow an applicant to live and work in the community while their case works its way through the hearing process. Trump has derisively called this "catch and release."


He’s got 50 days or so to complete all that. Fuckin’ liar.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on March 14, 2021, 01:04:15 AM
nadir your comment seemed to be attacking only dems i was just saying repub do same thing. generally yes the deck is stacked against regular people who are not rich.

we agree.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Memshin on March 14, 2021, 03:22:41 PM
No question that rich people have more than their fair share of power.
On the other hand, the Republican's major policy achievement, the 2017 tax cut, gave most of its benefits to rich people. While the democrat's recent rescue bill gives most of its benefits to the poor and working class. It's projected to cut poverty by a quarter, and cut child poverty in half.
Both-siderism can only go so far before it runs up against reality.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on March 14, 2021, 04:32:22 PM
No question that rich people have more than their fair share of power.
On the other hand, the Republican's major policy achievement, the 2017 tax cut, gave most of its benefits to rich people. While the democrat's recent rescue bill gives most of its benefits to the poor and working class. It's projected to cut poverty by a quarter, and cut child poverty in half.
Both-siderism can only go so far before it runs up against reality.

Right, but let’s not give Biden a perpetual pass like he’s getting from the media.

about the recent bill, I agree that the child allowance and school system support are definitely positive, but the fact that the bill leaves many living on $7.50 /hr so very disappointing, particularly when Biden supported the 15. It was kind of weak... or that deep down he as many Dems didn’t really want to push it to not disappoint some of their big donors? Well... we’ll see what the future four years bring.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: LeftyLarry on March 14, 2021, 09:45:57 PM
No question that rich people have more than their fair share of power.
On the other hand, the Republican's major policy achievement, the 2017 tax cut, gave most of its benefits to rich people. While the democrat's recent rescue bill gives most of its benefits to the poor and working class. It's projected to cut poverty by a quarter, and cut child poverty in half.
Both-siderism can only go so far before it runs up against reality.

Right, but let’s not give Biden a perpetual pass like he’s getting from the media.

about the recent bill, I agree that the child allowance and school system support are definitely positive, but the fact that the bill leaves many living on $7.50 /hr so very disappointing, particularly when Biden supported the 15. It was kind of weak... or that deep down he as many Dems didn’t really want to push it to not disappoint some of their big donors? Well... we’ll see what the future four years bring.

The stuff you guys say, bears little semblance to reality.

Most RICH live in big houses in Blue States where their Taxes on those homes range anywhere from $20 -250,000+ / year .

Trumps tax changes took away all but $ 10,000 of the SALT deduction.I don’t know one 1 RICH person who saved on his/ her personal taxes under Trump’s changes .

Of course I don’t know many billionaires, mostly people who earn between $350-1,000,000 / per.
Yes, America’s CORPORATIONS became competitive with the rest of the world’s who tax their corporations at even lower rates but that’s about gaining assets not paying taxes until you sell stocks.

Rather than trying to lift people out of poverty, jealous, angry, misguided Leftists would rather punish success,  which is why , in the end Leftist countries all end up in the toilet.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on March 14, 2021, 10:16:03 PM
with such a thin majority one democrat opposed the 15 dollar minimum and killed it I forget who.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on March 16, 2021, 11:18:40 PM
with such a thin majority one democrat opposed the 15 dollar minimum and killed it I forget who.

The problem that it is a one size fits all solution to a multi-faceted problem.  People working in Mississippi or New Mexico can live on substantially less income than those in California or New York.  Some of the higher rent districts, like Seattle, San Francisco, and New York already have a $15+/hr minimum.  Raising the wages in low cost of living states to equal those solves very little.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on March 17, 2021, 10:18:25 PM
The buying and selling of US Elected Representatives set to restart in earnest

https://www.pionline.com/elections/wall-street-looks-quietly-reopen-wallets-politicians
Wall Street looks to quietly reopen wallets for politicians
Quote
Wall Street firms are quietly preparing to resume political giving in the next few months, marking an end to a freeze that many corporations vowed to impose after rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol in January to disrupt congressional certification of Donald Trump's loss to President Joe Biden.

The pause on political action committee contributions, touted by major financial companies like J.P. Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs Group and BlackRock, alarmed lawmakers in both parties at the time, given how much of their campaigns are bankrolled by deep-pocketed corporate donors.

Yet it was never meant to be a shutdown of the Wall Street money machine, which contributed $787 million to the 2020 election, people familiar with the matter said. Instead, it was about publicly showing customers and stockholders that they were disgusted with the armed insurrection and the Republicans who directly or indirectly backed the effort.

Some of the 147 members of Congress who voted against certifying the election for Mr. Biden will remain on what's been dubbed the "no-fly list," a likely permanent ban on corporate PAC donations, like Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley or Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia.

Craig Engle, a political lawyer at the Arent Fox law firm in Washington, said he expects PACs to resume donations in earnest next month, but the memory of the insurrection will make it difficult to resume giving to some of the 147 senators and representatives and senators.

"That is truly a case-by-case, corporation-by-corporation or group-by-group decision," he said. "There is no general rule that is going to emerge."

And big banks, hedge funds and asset managers have always had other ways to keep the dollars flowing to members of Congress, including fundraising events that can bring in much more money than a PAC can donate. Wall Street firms also took advantage of a natural lull in the first few months after an election.

There is sparse data available on corporate giving so far this year, with some company PACs not scheduled to report to the Federal Election Commission until July 31.

Maintaining influence
But interviews with more than a dozen executives, lobbyists, and campaign finance lawyers show that the flurry of corporate announcements wasn't part of any strategy for firms to take their money out of politics. And most had plenty of back-up for making sure they maintained influence in Washington.

Charles Schwab Corp. was the only large brokerage that actually got rid of its PAC after the riot. It promised in a January statement to donate the remaining proceeds to the Boys & Girls Clubs of America and historically Black colleges and universities.

Notably excluded from the new policy were individual employees, including Charles Schwab himself, one of the firm's founders and chairman and one of the biggest political donors in the country. Over the past two years, he and his wife, Helen, made $18.7 million in contributions to Republicans, largesse that dwarfed the roughly $500,000 that the company's political action committee doled out to federal candidates and committees, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks campaign finance

The entire episode of publicly pulling donations could pose additional risk for Wall Street by alienating Republicans who traditionally have been the industry's biggest supporters.

The move was a "huge miscalculation," said Sam Geduldig, who used to lobby for Goldman, coming at a time when Republicans are becoming more populist and anti-big bank. Many Democrats feel the same way, he pointed out.

"Is there a better position in 2021 than for a politician of either party to say, 'Goldman Sachs won't give me money and I don't want it anyway?"' he asked. "Now they can run as martyrs."

Executives at Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan, for example, regularly host get-togethers with lawmakers who travel to New York looking to fill their campaign coffers. Though the practice has been suspended during the pandemic, Goldman Sachs partners held events in 2019 for Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., as well as Republican Sens. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Dan Sullivan of Alaska and David Perdue, who lost his Georgia Senate seat in January.

Those meetings can be more lucrative for the lawmaker than a corporate PAC check. A PAC typically can give a maximum of $20,000 to members of Congress: $5,000 for the primary, $5,000 for the general election and $5,000 a year to a member's leadership PAC. But a dinner with 10 finance executives, each bringing the maximum $5,800, can net $58,000.

PACs, which rely on voluntary donations from employees, are used by in-house lobbyists to buy access to a politician's fundraising breakfast, dinner or ski trip to Vail. Many, like Schwab's former PAC, balance donations between Republicans and Democrats.

Their bipartisan nature makes PACs less controversial inside companies where people's politics and party affiliation vary. However, with the polarization of the Trump era, that's become a tougher sell.

"There was a feeling that companies need to take a stand, and that was probably met with a concern about the brand," said Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics. "If companies so quickly and easily backtrack on the PAC suspension, it will prove to be a P.R. move."
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: LeftyLarry on March 18, 2021, 06:53:47 PM
So how would you get things to fundamentally change?

The hell do you mean? So he tells to a bunch of millionaires that nothing will change as we’ll transition from the Trump years and that’s ok with you?

What about drastically higher taxes to wealthy folks and corporations, $15 min wage now, not in 2024, decent Healthcare for all like in Europe, break the vicious circle education costs <-> education debt like in Europe, reduce police pressure and simultaneously legislate to reform prison system, so that we can walk in the streets like in Europe, what about no children held in borders, what about his immigration reform on day 1 promise, what about the fucking $2000 on day 1 promise that he still owes me, what about no fracking, no coal, no bombing other countries...

I’m just curious but when those drastically higher taxes on those wealthier folks and corporations make jobs and wealth go away ( as they always do)  and the deficit becomes even greater, bringing higher interest rates and inflation( both have started in U.S. already)  when millions of Migrants come to the U.S. and there are no jobs for them and they demand medical, food, education, homes and welfare, where does that money come from?

As for walking around safely in Europe? You are kidding, right?
There are no go zones all over France and other countries, the migrants raped hundreds in Germany and at least for women there are no go zones there too, knife attacks before Covid were a daily occurrence in many European Cities, drug deaths, thousands of European girls forced into prostitution and rampant corruption of police officials , bribery and payoffs a big part of life there.

The good News is Europeans don’t reproduce so their children are safe .


Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: gerontocrat on March 19, 2021, 03:23:17 PM
On the other hand..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/03/18/epa-website-climate/

Biden administration revives EPA Web page on climate change deleted by Trump

The return of the website again marks the chasm between the two administrations when it comes to climate policy
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on March 22, 2021, 10:47:42 PM
on the other other hand...
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on March 23, 2021, 11:05:13 AM
with such a thin majority one democrat opposed the 15 dollar minimum and killed it I forget who.

The problem that it is a one size fits all solution to a multi-faceted problem.  People working in Mississippi or New Mexico can live on substantially less income than those in California or New York.  Some of the higher rent districts, like Seattle, San Francisco, and New York already have a $15+/hr minimum.  Raising the wages in low cost of living states to equal those solves very little.
I agree that one size fits all is not the solution for minemum wage I was commenting on it was not Biden per say but a senator who killed it. But he did not fight for it very hard either. On the other hand some states would never raise it at all. Either way inflation is the preferred way to cut your pay and all but the super rich are getting poorer every year. 
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Memshin on March 23, 2021, 01:48:50 PM
The minimum wage was opposed by Sen Manchin of W. Virginia. But it was killed by the Senate parliamentarian, who ruled it could not be included in this (filibuster proof) reconciliation bill. Without that ruling, Biden might have found some way to pressure or compromise with Manchin. As it was, Biden correctly concluded it wasn't worth jeapardizing or delaying the other highly progressive portions of the bill to try to include the wage hike
.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Memshin on March 23, 2021, 03:31:41 PM
Walrus - it is rigged in favor of of "the little guy" only if you think states are guys. But for the people in those states, if CA has 53x alaska's population, each person in alaska has 53 times the power to elect senators as each person in california. And about the same in electing presidents.
 And the current results of the founder's set-up is to strongly rig the Senate and presidency in favor of republicans.
In the house, democrats tends to get more total votes. It only has been relatively evenly divided because of gerrymandering.

That is true for Senators, but not Congressmen or the President.  The Senate currently favors the GOP, but that was not true in the past.  50 years ago, the Democrats held a 10-seat advantage, due mainly to representation from smaller states.  The three largest states (NY, CA, and PA) all had 2 Republican Senators.  Was anyone complaining about rigging then?  No, that is just the way the pendulum swings. 

Last year in the House, the Democrats won 51.0% of the seats (221), with 50.8% of the votes.  The Republicans won 49.0% of the seats (213) with  47.7% of the vote.  Statistically, that is amazingly close.  Where is your evidence of rigging there?  There are very few districts that are gerrymandered to favor one party or the other - yes, both parties do it.  Since districts are redrawn with every census, whichever party controls the legislature in each state, has the upper hand in the redistricting.  Each party tries to tilt elections in their favor.
I agree the House is less 'rigged' than the Senate. But small differences can have large consequences in our divided country. I also agree that both Democrats and Republicans often gerrymander when they have the chance. The lure of power is strong. I would guess, from my own experience in political activism, that the effects of gerrymandering are even stronger in state legislatures, but haven't tried to check that. Also, we haven't even mentioned the long running efforts at voter suppression, especially against minorities and poorer people. These have become especially popular this year in Republican run states.
The Senate favored Democrats 50 yrs ago, but many of those were strongly segregationist culturally conservative Democrats from low population southern states. The parties have realigned since then. The political heirs of those segregationists are now Republicans, and their states are still favored in the Senate.
The presidency is somewhere between the House and Senate in its level of 'riggedness'. Each state has electoral college votes equal to the sum of their Senators and Representatives, so states with more than their population's fair share of power in the Senate also have more power in the electoral college. Otherwise, we would have had Presidents Gore and Hillary Clinton.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: LeftyLarry on March 24, 2021, 03:34:24 AM
Please define Voter suppression.

my experience is , that usually means following existing election laws.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: karl dubhe2 on March 25, 2021, 06:44:31 PM
Please define Voter suppression.

my experience is , that usually means following existing election laws.

Your experience is very recent, and rather biased by the right-wing propaganda you use.  Existing laws aren't the problem though, are they?   

The laws that the Republicans are proposing in the various states they control would reduce the opportunities that people have to vote.   If you're working all of the time, you're not going to show up at the polls.   Is that what you want?   To have hard working citizens denied the right to exercise their franchise?    Why does anyone need an excuse to vote by mail?   As long as you're only voting once.   BTW in my experience it seems to be Republicans who get caught voting multiple times lately.

The USA already has a very uneven balance between rural and urban power; with the rural (and more conservative areas) having an effective majority in power in spite of having far fewer numbers and a lower level of economic activity.   If you guys had the same proportion of people in the House of Representatives that your ancestors did there'd be over 10k of them...   

Representation by population.  How does it work again?
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: interstitial on March 26, 2021, 02:08:12 AM
Republicans should spend more time learning about reality (good and bad) and less time suppressing people with different backgrounds and information about reality.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: LeftyLarry on March 26, 2021, 03:45:04 AM
It really doesnt matter who holds political power in the USA because the same shit happens regardless..... the only real thing that changes is how they dress it up.

If you want real change, stop buying stuff, become a minimalist, drive less and ride a bike more, and buy local from small businesses.
Reduce and eliminate all debt and save your money, and don't invest in real estate or the stock market.
And move out of the cities.

Do those things and those super-rich and powerful men will struggle and fall from their fragile pedestal

Agreed, live in a studio apartment, mattress on the floor, who needs chairs, don’t bother with marriage or children, they both consume too much stuff, ride a bike, walk, don’t eat much, certainly be a vegan, certainly don’t go to Restaurants, don’t go to the theatre, a concert, Art museum , pay taxes at the highest rate possible, don’t invest in Real Estate or Wall Street or have a  pension fund, why be comfortable when you are 65, do the right thing then just die to save the planet.

No sports except hiking locally, forget skiing, boating, golf , no nice vacations , or nice clothing, don’t buy those electronics , try not to use your phone too much, teach those Rich guys a lesson!

This sounds like a great full life and the secret to success and happiness , why haven’t I thought of this before.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Memshin on March 26, 2021, 03:21:02 PM
Existing laws are also part of the problem. Take common voter id laws, passed in many states even though there has never been evidence of fraud they would correct. Government issued id is usually a drivers license. Rural people and wealthier people are very likely to have one. Poor people living in inner cities often can't afford a car and need one less, and these are mostly black people. The intent and effect of these laws is suppressing the votes of the poor and minorities.
Laws preventing ex felons from voting are the same. Drug laws are largely by intent racist, and large numbers of felons are black people convicted for small amounts of marijuana or other drugs.
These might be more subtle than the poll taxes and literacy tests common in the past, but the intent and effect is the same.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: NevB on March 26, 2021, 04:45:14 PM
Please define Voter suppression.

my experience is , that usually means following existing election laws.

That's easy, just one example, if you think the GOP isn't about voter suppression you're very wrong.

Quote
Georgia Bans Handing Out Water to Voters Waiting in Line, Because 'Election Integrity'

https://reason.com/2021/03/26/georgia-bans-handing-out-water-to-voters-waiting-in-line-because-election-integrity/ (https://reason.com/2021/03/26/georgia-bans-handing-out-water-to-voters-waiting-in-line-because-election-integrity/)

Here (Australia) we can vote early (this is very popular due to the convenience), we can vote absent, we can mail in, whatever option we like and there is never and has never been any question of any significant fraud.

We also have compulsory voting in that if you are on the electoral roll you get a small fine if you don't get your name crossed of. (this still doesn't mean you have to vote but you have to attend in some way). Importantly the government then has an obligation to ensure everyone has free and easy access to a polling station. Voting is on a Saturday at schools and public buildings and never takes more than 10 minutes.

An independent electoral commission sets the electoral boundaries and runs the elections. This has always had full bipartisan support, the boundaries are fair and honest with the gerrymander having been eliminated in the 70's.

This as an example of some of the possibilities.

Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on March 26, 2021, 06:53:08 PM
This is a pretty hypocritical framing of the story from Biden and co.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Rodius on March 26, 2021, 11:01:18 PM
This is a pretty hypocritical framing of the story from Biden and co.

How anyone can think that minors in cages is okay is beyond me.
This is a outrage that is doubly worse because the US pretends to set the standards of global behaviour and are super critical of other countries (especially China) who do the same exactly bloody thing.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: The Walrus on March 27, 2021, 02:20:46 PM
Please define Voter suppression.

my experience is , that usually means following existing election laws.

Your experience is very recent, and rather biased by the right-wing propaganda you use.  Existing laws aren't the problem though, are they?   

The laws that the Republicans are proposing in the various states they control would reduce the opportunities that people have to vote.   If you're working all of the time, you're not going to show up at the polls.   Is that what you want?   To have hard working citizens denied the right to exercise their franchise?    Why does anyone need an excuse to vote by mail?   As long as you're only voting once.   BTW in my experience it seems to be Republicans who get caught voting multiple times lately.

The USA already has a very uneven balance between rural and urban power; with the rural (and more conservative areas) having an effective majority in power in spite of having far fewer numbers and a lower level of economic activity.   If you guys had the same proportion of people in the House of Representatives that your ancestors did there'd be over 10k of them...   

Representation by population.  How does it work again?

The basic premise is one person, one vote. The issue is how to ensure that.  It starts with how long should we allow the voting process to take.  Different states have different lengths.  There is no right length of time to vote.  Different rules exist for voting by mail or absentee.  Many ballots are “spoiled” because people do not follow the rules.  Yet, some people claim that enforcing these rules amounts to suppression, because their votes no longer count.  Voting at the polls increases the probability that their vote will count.

To ensure someone is voting in the correct district, they must register there.  One problem is keeping these lists up to date.  No one checks if someone moves or dies.  They can be on the list indefinitely, and some have casts votes long afterwards.  Congress has mandated that states keep these lists up to date, but whenever a state tries to purge non voters from their lists, someone cries “suppression.”  Voter ID is one way to help ensure that these lists are up to date, but it cannot prevent people with multiple residences from voting in both places, if they vote in person in one and absentee in the other.  Even the registration process is ripe for fraud.  Past campaigns to register non voters by party supporters have allowed those supporters to “help” cast their vote.  There is no perfect system, and those in power will always use the current system to enhance their power, whether legally or otherwise.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: LeftyLarry on March 28, 2021, 04:43:36 AM
This is a pretty hypocritical framing of the story from Biden and co.

How anyone can think that minors in cages is okay is beyond me.
This is a outrage that is doubly worse because the US pretends to set the standards of global behaviour and are super critical of other countries (especially China) who do the same exactly bloody thing.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-cages/fact-check-photos-of-children-in-cages-dont-show-migrant-kids-in-u-s-idUSKBN24117B
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Diaminedave on March 28, 2021, 02:52:13 PM
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/06/ceci-nest-pas-une-cage/563072/
What is a cage?

Yes happened under Obama...stopped
A lot under Trump
Don't know under Biden

If you guys want Jesus as President you will have a long time waiting.
The casual indifference of Trump to suffeering and abuse was obvious during his campaign and during his presidency.
Sad!....as your leader was prone to saying
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Rodius on March 28, 2021, 03:05:27 PM
This is a pretty hypocritical framing of the story from Biden and co.

How anyone can think that minors in cages is okay is beyond me.
This is a outrage that is doubly worse because the US pretends to set the standards of global behaviour and are super critical of other countries (especially China) who do the same exactly bloody thing.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-cages/fact-check-photos-of-children-in-cages-dont-show-migrant-kids-in-u-s-idUSKBN24117B

THank you for the article.
Yes, there are images of artists highlighting how the US put kids into cages and they were used as if they were real.

Oddly enough, a link within the article your shared has this......
https://www.reuters.com/video/watch/dhs-secretary-grilled-over-cages-id522680112

In short, the people in the video are talking about how the US is putting kids into cages.
Go figure......
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on March 29, 2021, 01:46:28 AM
Gosh, I wish I had a tenth of GG’s perception & articulation to respond to Biden’s cabinet members’ platitudes with *very* ugly truths condensed in a very short Twitter. GG remains being one of the few free and ballsy journalists out there and that’s why he is so hated and vilified, and why we should decisively support people like him.

He’s on the tight rope... being the target from liberals and their cancel-culture mobs to dangerous Bolsonaro mafia elements... if I was a believer I’d pray for his well-being.
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: nadir on April 02, 2021, 04:40:36 PM
This is Biden’s way of calling an entire country “a sh*thole”.
This was tweeted by the US Embassy Haiti a couple of days ago.

(BTW is he starting to get an orange tan too?)
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: LeftyLarry on April 02, 2021, 10:49:41 PM
This is a pretty hypocritical framing of the story from Biden and co.

How anyone can think that minors in cages is okay is beyond me.
This is a outrage that is doubly worse because the US pretends to set the standards of global behaviour and are super critical of other countries (especially China) who do the same exactly bloody thing.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-cages/fact-check-photos-of-children-in-cages-dont-show-migrant-kids-in-u-s-idUSKBN24117B

THank you for the article.
Yes, there are images of artists highlighting how the US put kids into cages and they were used as if they were real.

Oddly enough, a link within the article your shared has this......
https://www.reuters.com/video/watch/dhs-secretary-grilled-over-cages-id522680112

In short, the people in the video are talking about how the US is putting kids into cages.
Go figure......

I’m unclear, are these kids in the cages, the same ones who are being giving schooling with in person teachers during Covid , while American kids are being taught remotely on computers or are those different kids in cages?

https://nypost.com/2021/03/30/migrant-kids-get-in-person-school-while-kids-are-on-spring-break/
Title: Re: Biden’s Presidency
Post by: Ranman99 on April 03, 2021, 04:28:26 AM
https://haitiantimes.com/2021/03/24/dont-come-us-embassy-tells-haitians-in-puzzling-tweets/

Read more.