Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
Post Reply
User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20764
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

I can't vote for Trump. But unless Biden dies or quits the race, I wont be able to vote Democrat this time. In reference to his age, when he says "I can't even say the number. It doesn't register with me" he really means it.
Americans hold a better view of former President Donald Trump's, who is widely seen as the frontrunner of the Republican primary race, capabilities to physically and mentally serve as president compared to Biden. Some 64% of Americans think Trump is in good enough physical health to serve and 54% think Trump is mentally fit to serve.

And in a hypothetical 2024 general election matchup, Biden is falling behind Trump, with 44% of voting-age respondents saying they would either “definitely” or “probably’ vote for Trump while 38% say the same for Biden. Meanwhile, 18% are undecided.

Biden is also trailing behind the other frontrunner in the GOP 2024 primary, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is expected to soon launch a presidential campaign. Some 42% of voting-age respondents said they would definitely or probably vote for DeSantis compared to 37% who would vote for Biden, and 21% are undecided.
Story is in the NYT and WaPo but they have paywalls so here's the hotel parrot-cage liner:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 192303007/
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20764
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

There may be a way out . . .
Image
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

Big RR
Posts: 14097
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by Big RR »

Meade--as someone who has voted for third party candidates (even for president) a number of times, I understand; but since the election appears to be fairly close, I think a vote of that kind could easily wind up as a vote for Trump. Face it, Biden doesn't have anywhere near the number of loyal (or rabid) supporters Trump does--people who will vote for Trump no matter what--and splitting the "no Trump" vote can easily result in Trump's victory. Personally, that compels me to vote for Biden, or pretty much whoever else the dems run, even though I do have my concerns. I don't love voting for the lesser of two evils, but when the alternative is Trump (or, even worse, DeSantis--Trump with some hint of a brain), I don't think I have any real choice. I don't think 4 more years of Biden will be great (and I hope he plays very close attention to his VP candidate as that person may be president for part of it), but a president Trump, or DeSantis (or pretty much whoever else the republicans are likely to run) would be a disaster. I strongly urge you to reconsider.

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 18383
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by BoSoxGal »

I can’t get on board with the Biden loathing. He’s done more to improve the lives of regular Americans than any other president in recent history especially considering he was also on the team that gave us the affordable care act.

When we have two old geezers running against one another, age cannot be disqualifying. Biden is vital and still capable of handling a huge workload. He is probably fitter than many who post here. He has an excellent team in place who are getting great things done within the confines of dealing with the radical extremist GOP.

I would certainly not risk my country’s future by voting against Biden or throwing my vote away.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20764
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Thank you both. I suppose that by November 2024 I'll be more-or-less resigned to voting Biden - sadly again, a vote against the other rather than for the one. (I don't loathe him, BTW)

I don't think much positively of the Biden administration except that other forms of government are so much worse. Support for Ukraine has been positive. And the Leftunatic wing seems to have stopped flapping. What I will be doing is voting Dem for House, Senate and dog-catcher all along the line. Though only the last job stands much of a chance in my bit of Ohio.

I was a poll-worker in Nov last year and a standby for the locals this month - except there were only five precincts voting (none of them mine) and even less contests or issues. But if I'm spared, the next two Novembers should be increasingly interesting. As a registered Republican, I'm in demand. Almost all the Board of Elections staff and other poll-workers are Dems so I'm useful as the +1 who makes some things legitimate (such as escorting the ballot boxes to the counting centre).
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 18383
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by BoSoxGal »

I should have included in my earlier comment that one of the very good things about Biden in light of his advanced age is that he has a terrific VP who has done the prescribed job very well considering the extra baggage she’s carrying of being POCx2 and a woman to boot. I have zero qualms about her possibly inheriting the job at some point in Biden’s second term. She is getting priceless OJT with Biden and benefit of over 50 years experience in how to make the federal government work and how to play nice and strong with other nations.

Any bets on who Trump might pick to run with him?
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 9032
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Surrounded by Trumptards in Rockland, WI – a small rural village in La Crosse County

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by Bicycle Bill »

BoSoxGal wrote:
Mon May 08, 2023 6:22 pm
Any bets on who Trump might pick to run with him?
First of all, let me say that this could become a moot case if the former POTUS (Prevaricator of the United States) is found guilty on any of the charges he is currently dodging.   But as a casual observer, I suspect that Trump and DeSantis will run against each other all the way through the 2024 primaries, fueling innumerable articles and op-ed pieces about one or the other and how (depending on the writer's political leaning) they will save or destroy the country — which will, of course, be of uncountable value to a huckster like Trump who knows all too well that even bad publicity is still publicity.

Then, at the last minute, DeSantis — knowing full well that Trump is no spring chicken (he would be 78 years old on Inauguration Day 2025) — will take a calculated risk, cut an under-the-table deal with the former president to withdraw from the race, and direct his supporters and any possible GOP Convention delegates he has to climb onto the Trump bandwagon in exchange for the Veep position, figuring that if Trump wins the election he (DeSantis) will succeed to the Oval Office once Donny kicks the bucket.

Although it doesn't matter to me.   As far as I'm concerned, the Democrats could run Jimmy Carter again, or the ghost of Shirley Chisholm, and I'd vote for either one.
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8570
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by Sue U »

Look, even in 2020 Biden was nobody's first choice, but Democrats did the sensible thing and nominated a steady and competent if all-too-familiar candidate rather than an aspirational one in order to ensure Trump's defeat. And even then it was too close a call. Things have not gotten better in this country's political life and worse still, Cheetoh Mussolini is still the de facto ruler of the GOP. I've voted "not Democrat" more times than I can count, but at this point the stakes are too high to indulge my personal preferences. Trumpism must be crushed decisively in order to preserve American democracy, and I don't think that's an exaggeration
GAH!

Big RR
Posts: 14097
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by Big RR »

Sue--how do you feel about Harris as VP? Although I have no negative views of her, I don't have very much positive I have seen either. It seems she has been kept pretty much under wraps (not bad for a VP), but I am not sure how much she has really learned> I'd have no problem with her as president should Biden die in office 9and face it, whatever shape he's in, that office is stressful unless you just leave everything to your handlers (like Trump did, just playing the president/asshole during some speeches and rallies) but I don't really know if there is anyone else in the dem party who would be a better running mate, even though some might be better (really more successful presidents.

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8570
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by Sue U »

Although I preferred Warren's policy platform, I supported Harris in the primaries precisely because I thought she could eviscerate Trump on the campaign trail and particularly in the debates. (And honestly, Biden was not even my third choice going into 2020.) Seeing her speak at the Women's March in January 2017 I knew she could bring it, and she handily dismantled Pence in the Veep under-card match, although that was frankly a pretty low bar. I am a bit surprised that the Biden Administration has not been giving her a more prominent role, but I guess there is also a strategic angle to holding her back until later in the term so as not to become a daily target for a full four years of GOP attacks. Although no one is really prepared for the job unless they've already done it, I think Harris would make a fine president, having proven savvy at California politics and gaining significant administrative experience as the state AG before getting an inside look at the presidency as VP.
GAH!

Big RR
Posts: 14097
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by Big RR »

I recall having concerns with some of the positions she took as AG, but that's a while ago. I think she could be a good president, and is likely better qualified than most of the other dems, but her inconsistent positions as AG (after all, she styled herself as a "progressive prosecutor--and in San Francisco she generally was--not so much in Sacramento) still concern me as to how she would stand up to political pressure as president; hopefully her later experiences will help in this regard.

I recall years ago seeing an interview with a NY congressman, Dick Ottinger, who said that there are two types of decisions a representative has to make; for some (s)he must represent the people and vote their view, but for important, often moral, issues, (s)he must use his/her judgment--especially if (s)he campaigned with some positions on those issues. Politics does require compromise, but all issues are no necessarily up for grabs. A seasoned politician learns this the hard way.

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8570
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by Sue U »

Despite the Republican hysteria about how Democrats are radical Marxist communists (if only!), Harris is certainly way more of a centrist than I (or even the liberal wing of the Democratic Party) would prefer. Some of that is personal background/temperament and some is a function of political realities, both in the ideological shifts within the Democratic Party and in running a winning campaign for elected office. Here's a pretty good discussion of Harris and her record from Code Switch on NPR:
Let's Talk About Kamala Harris

October 14, 2020 12:20 AM ET

Not long ago, we dove into some of the big generational divides among Black Democratic voters. And in that episode — which we did right after Kamala Harris was named the Democratic nominee for vice president — we asked if we should explore her complicated history as a prosecutor.

Y'all gave us a resounding hell yes. So this week, we're going long on Harris's history as a self-described "top cop" and "progressive prosecutor" in California.

Over the last few years, voters in the Democratic party have moved to the left on issues of race and criminal justice, which has made things complicated for Harris during the 2020 presidential campaign. (Remember all the "Kamala is a cop" memes?)

But since her start as a prosecutor in Oakland, Harris has always navigated tricky political terrain, says Jamilah King, a reporter at Mother Jones and Bay Area native who has written on Harris's early political career. We talked to King about that record, what it means to be a "progressive prosecutor," and why it's so tough to pin down Harris ideologically. Our conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Tell us a little bit about the landscape that Harris was stepping into in the early 1990s, when she was beginning her career as a prosecutor.

When Kamala Harris ran for public office in 2003, there was no such thing as a "progressive prosecutor." I think that's important to start with. And the person that she was replacing, Terrence Hallinan, was considered to be super progressive. And still, he prosecuted the last case in San Francisco that used the death penalty. So this was a very, very different era. Coming out of the '80s and '90s, there was still a lot of the "tough on crime" rhetoric that politicians needed to use to get elected.

But thanks to the activism of a lot of folks who were formerly incarcerated and their families, we're starting to see the limitations of those policies.

In her first race for district attorney, you said she was running against Hallinan, someone who was considered as progressive as prosecutors could have been back in the early '90s. So how was she pitching herself as a candidate against him?

She was pitching herself as a "get-it-done" progressive. This was San Francisco, so everybody was more or less somewhere on the progressive spectrum. But she was definitely more on the moderate end of the progressive spectrum, so she talked a lot about bringing law and order to the streets.

There was this sort of old-school rhetoric, like the Black folks in the neighborhood who are like, well, if they would just go to school and pull up their pants. I mean, Harris never said "pull up their pants." But we know that rhetoric, right? Like, if we can just give people the resources that they need to engage meaningfully in society, they'll do it. There was definitely this strain of personal responsibility that ran throughout what she was proposing. So she was running as a progressive, but she was a moderate progressive.

Can you say more about what it meant to be a "progressive prosecutor" the way she was trying to be?

She definitely tried to use that label to describe herself in her book, which she released shortly before she announced her run for president. But it never quite fit, right? It didn't quite make sense.

I don't want to speculate about how Kamala Harris is coming to her racial identity, but I'm going to do it anyway. She talks a lot about being the daughter of immigrants. She talks a lot about, you know, growing up sort of in the shadow of the civil rights movement, which was its own display of respectability politics. She doesn't necessarily talk about growing up in the backyard of the Black Panthers in Oakland.

She's the daughter of two professors.. She also went to Howard and pledged Alpha Kappa Alpha. And I love them — I have many AKAs in my life who I love and adore dearly — but they are not typically the folks with fists raised, trying to beat down the system. They very much have a political ideology built on being twice as good, on showing up in the crispest suit.

One quote that I find interesting, that her mother gave an interview to a Bay Area reporter, basically said, she can definitely hang with all these people; she knows which forks to use at the dinner table. She's been in these spaces of power and privilege, and she is trying to wield them in a way that's beneficial to black folks.

One of her signature programs when she was the district attorney of San Francisco was called "Back On Track." How did that program work?

"Back On Track" was a relatively small program that Kamala Harris started in the San Francisco District Attorney's office. It was an alternative to incarceration for first-time nonviolent offenders.

I spoke to one young woman who graduated from the program. She was in a tough spot. She was a college student. She was Black. She made a bad decision, started to sell drugs and got caught. And she was put in this "Back On Track" program, where the big thing was that participants had to plead guilty.

So the participants would have a felony on their records.

They would have a felony on their record, but that felony would be expunged if they finished the program. The program consisted of everything under the sun. It was an internship program, but it was also for other things: if you needed counseling, job preparation, or resume help. At one point, Kamala Harris and her staff realized that folks needed stress relief, and they wanted a gym membership. So she got 24 Hour Fitness to donate memberships to the program. And it was a pretty successful program, given how small it was.

I think it's important to note, too, that she has always had a lot of political ambition and sought higher office for herself. And half of California is a deeply conservative state, so if she was going to run statewide, she needed to not be seen as someone who was making it easy for people who had broken the law to re-enter society.

This was California. This is the land of "three strikes" sentencing laws. This is the same state that the Supreme Court said had such overcrowded prisons that it was functionally cruel and unusual to have prisoners incarcerated in them. So California is a deeply punitive state. You wrote that, in one point in her career, Harris declined to seek the death penalty in the case of a man who was convicted of killing a police officer. Can you tell us a little bit about her thinking and what the public response to that decision was?

So in 2004, a few months after Kamala Harris took office, there was a shooting in Baby Hunter's Point, which is a predominantly black working class neighborhood in San Francisco. A young police officer named Isaac Espinosa was shot and killed. Kamala Harris had run on a platform that committed to not seeking the death penalty. [So as the district attorney and prosecutor on the case], she declined to pursue the death penalty.

And at the time, it was a really controversial decision. Senator Dianne Feinstein was very opposed to Kamala Harris's decision and even said that if she'd known that Kamala Harris would have done something like this, she would not have supported her for district attorney. And California's police unions were incensed. So this made it harder for her when she decided to run for attorney general of the state. She had to really mend a lot of those bridges.

In your reporting, you get at why it's so hard to pin her down ideologically. What are some some examples of conflicting policies that she supported, as the D.A. of San Francisco and then as the A.G. of California?

As district attorney of San Francisco, she declined to pursue the death penalty. But as attorney general of California, she defended the state's use of the death penalty. She essentially said: look, I'm doing my job. It's the largest attorney general's office, second to the U.S. attorney general. And after the Supreme Court ruled that California had basically put way too many people in prison, her office argued that they needed to have these folks in prison because they were essential to prison labor. [Later, Harris told BuzzFeed that she hadn't known that was an argument that her office was taking. — Ed.]

She's tried to distance herself from the more controversial decisions that her office made. She was in support of gay marriage. She co-sponsored a bill that outlawed the so-called "gay panic defense."

But with marijuana legalization, it took her a while to come around to that — especially as someone whose signature program, "Back On Track," was largely geared toward nonviolent, first-time offenders who maybe sold weed, [her wariness] was a really big deal.
Politics
Harris Enters 2020 Race With Political Baggage From Time As Calif. Attorney General

But what she didn't do was make these grand gestures like her political cousin Gavin Newsom, who in 2004 legalized gay marriage in San Francisco and began officiating ceremonies. That was a huge grand gesture. But Kamala Harris, by virtue of her temperament and also her profession, was looking at the very specific details of how to actually change the law. And that, I think, doesn't warrant as much praise [from the public].

I think it's incredibly hard to create change from within law enforcement. She was within the confines of a law enforcement system and a criminal justice system that has been very, very slow to change. And only in the last five to ten years has there really been a large following around issues like prison abolition.
Sponsor Message

So how much of this criticism of her prosecutorial record and the way she's navigated her career is about the specific social location she occupies as a Black woman? And how do we square that with legitimate concern about the overreach of the criminal justice system?

I think it's important to look at what she's done in the Senate to really get a sense on who she is and how much her ideas now contradict what she did in office. For instance, after George Floyd was murdered, she ended up co-introducing legislation that would reform policing federally. It would introduce many federal mandates around how police act in different jurisdictions. And one of the ways that her legal experience came in handy was she was looking at the actual terminology that was being used to outlaw chokeholds. Because she knows the system, she was like, look, this isn't specific enough. You need to actually change the language so that it says something like, police officers cannot use any maneuvers that stop [breathing]. So I think in that instance, you see her law enforcement experience really coming up to the fore and being incredibly useful in her attempts to reform things.

But I think another huge part of this is that she is a Black woman who was in elected office in an era when that just didn't really happen. And she was in law enforcement, no less. In the last four years, we've seen so much lip service paid to the fact that Black women have long been the backbone of the Democratic Party. But she was doing this 20 years ago. And I think just the game was different then. You didn't have a you didn't have sort of a mainstream Democratic electorate, or even a progressive Democratic electorate, that was pushing for the same issues that it's pushing for now.

I think the circumstances in the specific landscape around her has changed. It's pushed her to articulate a vision that she believes in. But more importantly, it's made her be precise about how she's going to use her law enforcement experience to shift the systems that she's trying to change.

How do people who experienced the criminal justice system under Kamala Harris's tenure —in San Francisco and later the state of California — think about her time as a prosecutor?

That's a really important question. And it depends on how deep within the system you were.

So there are folks like Jamal Trulove, a young Black man who grew up in San Francisco who was incarcerated for a murder that he was very clear that he didn't commit. And later, an appeals court found that Kamala Harris's office had overzealously prosecuted his case, despite there being evidence that he was innocent. He obviously is very, very critical of her record.

I'm from San Francisco. I know folks who've been in the system and they'll just say flat out: "Look, she's a cop. She put us in jail." I'm not trying to try to [support her]. On the other hand, it's always been really telling for me that there are a lot of organizers and community groups within California and San Francisco's criminal justice reform system that are pretty ride-or-die for her. They don't agree necessarily with all of the decisions she's made, but they recognize that she was one of the few people to even give them a seat at the table.

She's this complicated figure, but I think she's earned the respect of a lot of the people who are doing criminal justice work, who recognize what the confines are. They recognize what's possible, and they also recognize when she's wrong. That's not to say that everybody is in favor of her. But I think there's this long history in San Francisco specifically of sort of Black folks in elected office being a little bit more moderate than sort of the white progressives who end up getting the headlines.
GAH!

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 18383
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by BoSoxGal »

Did anyone watch the Trump show on CNN (what were they thinking?!) last night?

I didn’t watch it but am seeing clips from it on Morning Joe this morning. Appalling as usual. The sickening thing more than anything is the audience eating him up like greasy fair food.

I’m not sure I can stand a reboot of Trump.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
Crackpot
Posts: 11282
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 2:59 am
Location: Michigan

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by Crackpot »

I hear they filled the audience with Trumpies. I was a bit heartened by how sparse the applause was for the
Composition. (More akward silence with a few nutters thrown in.
Okay... There's all kinds of things wrong with what you just said.

Jarlaxle
Posts: 5372
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:21 am
Location: New England

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by Jarlaxle »

BoSoxGal wrote:
Mon May 08, 2023 2:52 pm
I can’t get on board with the Biden loathing. He’s done more to improve the lives of regular Americans than any other president in recent history especially considering he was also on the team that gave us the affordable care act.
That alone would mean I would vote for ANYONE else.
When we have two old geezers running against one another, age cannot be disqualifying. Biden is vital and still capable of handling a huge workload.
How can you post that with a straight face? He was never the sharpest spoon in the drawer, and he is deteriorating by the week. He is a doddering old man in the throes of advancing senility.

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 18383
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by BoSoxGal »

Jarlaxle wrote:
Fri May 12, 2023 6:00 pm
When we have two old geezers running against one another, age cannot be disqualifying. Biden is vital and still capable of handling a huge workload.
How can you post that with a straight face? He was never the sharpest spoon in the drawer, and he is deteriorating by the week. He is a doddering old man in the throes of advancing senility.
Exhibit A the power of immersing oneself in right wing disinformation propaganda.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 5442
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

Jarlaxle wrote:
Fri May 12, 2023 6:00 pm
BoSoxGal wrote:
Mon May 08, 2023 2:52 pm
I can’t get on board with the Biden loathing. He’s done more to improve the lives of regular Americans than any other president in recent history especially considering he was also on the team that gave us the affordable care act.
That alone would mean I would vote for ANYONE else.
Jarl I'm really curious what you have against the ACA. I'm convinced that US health care is one of the best in the world for those who have access to it. The ACA has meant that the 37 million un- or under- insured ten years or so ago is down to about half that now and that is despite Republicans' best efforts to eliminate or curtail the ACA. Why do you think it's a bad thing that some people who had little or no access to decent healthcare a few years ago can now get treatment? It's not perfect and it does not go far enough IMO but it is much, much, much better than nothing.

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 18383
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by BoSoxGal »

I feel very strongly about ACA myself because I am very keenly aware that if not for the affordable healthcare I’ve received over the last few years I would be 100% dead. Now I know that would please some folks, but I have a nice dog and I’m inclined to keep struggling along the next decade or so to give her the best life possible - and improve my own in the process.

I’m also keenly aware that if the ACA had existed 30 years ago, I could have had medical care that I really desperately needed and that would very likely have saved me from a lot of illness and suffering that came later. That early intervention would have also most certainly substantially improved my ability to give of myself more and longer in my career, too.

What we really need is to expand and improve on the ACA and thereby improve quality of life across the board, especially in the grievance class which ironically rails the loudest against Obamacare but benefits most from it (don’t take away my ACA, they cry - not realizing it’s the same thing).
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

Jarlaxle
Posts: 5372
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:21 am
Location: New England

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by Jarlaxle »

BoSoxGal wrote:
Fri May 12, 2023 6:36 pm
Jarlaxle wrote:
Fri May 12, 2023 6:00 pm
When we have two old geezers running against one another, age cannot be disqualifying. Biden is vital and still capable of handling a huge workload.
How can you post that with a straight face? He was never the sharpest spoon in the drawer, and he is deteriorating by the week. He is a doddering old man in the throes of advancing senility.
Exhibit A the power of immersing oneself in right wing disinformation propaganda.
No, actually...from listening to Biden stumble through speech.

Jarlaxle
Posts: 5372
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:21 am
Location: New England

Re: Kinda sure that I cannot vote for Biden in '24

Post by Jarlaxle »

ex-khobar Andy wrote:
Sat May 13, 2023 12:20 am
Jarlaxle wrote:
Fri May 12, 2023 6:00 pm
BoSoxGal wrote:
Mon May 08, 2023 2:52 pm
I can’t get on board with the Biden loathing. He’s done more to improve the lives of regular Americans than any other president in recent history especially considering he was also on the team that gave us the affordable care act.
That alone would mean I would vote for ANYONE else.
Jarl I'm really curious what you have against the ACA. I'm convinced that US health care is one of the best in the world for those who have access to it. The ACA has meant that the 37 million un- or under- insured ten years or so ago is down to about half that now and that is despite Republicans' best efforts to eliminate or curtail the ACA. Why do you think it's a bad thing that some people who had little or no access to decent healthcare a few years ago can now get treatment? It's not perfect and it does not go far enough IMO but it is much, much, much better than nothing.
Mostly? Because my wife got nuked. She lost her GP, her orthopedist (the guy that fixed her knee) and her insurance premium tripled for worse coverage. Fortunately, I could add her to my insurance, though still paying more than she had been.

Post Reply