"Washington Post columnist George Will revealed he planned for the first time to vote for a Democrat in this year’s presidential election."
I have always respected George Will for his intelligence as well as his civil and intellectual approach to discussing his conservative political positions. Of course, it helps that I'm right of center. But now my respect for him is at a higher level than ever as he's putting country ahead of tribalism. Thank you, Mr. Will, not so much for the Biden vote, itself, but more so for the impact of announcing your intention to vote for Biden.
I can empathize as I've voted GOP all but twice for POTUS. 2020 will be only the 3rd time. Hopefully 2024 will reverse the trend for Will and myself. As Will said, his voting for a Dem is intended to be temporary and though now independent he very much remains a conservative just as I very much remain a right of center independent.
Thanks Larry!
I can see good arguments for not voting for Trump. I prefer looking at results vs words, but I get it.
What I can't see are good arguments for voting for Biden.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/508952-trump-has-100-days-to-turn-things-around
"The president in recent days has changed his strategy in dealing with the coronavirus pandemic as polls show presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden leading in the battleground states that will determine who win the White House.
Biden is also competitive in some red states, such as Texas, Georgia, Ohio and Iowa, that Trump must win to have a path to victory.
Trump and the GOP are facing a potential Election Day disaster on Nov. 3 if they do not quickly change the trajectory of the race.
The Republican Senate majority is in danger and the GOP’s hopes of winning back the House appear to be long gone.
“The landscape is very problematic for Republicans right now and there is a chance that Democrats could control the White House, the Senate and the House that’s becoming a stark reality for the GOP,” said former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele."
"Democratic strategists and operatives believe the 2020 race will get closer as the election nears.
“Recent numbers have been moving in our favor but our expectation is it’s going to tighten,” said Josh Schwerin, a strategist with Priorities USA, the largest outside group supporting Biden’s campaign.
The coronavirus and racial inequality are top of mind for many voters. Biden leads by double-digits on both issues.
The president has shifted in recent days to square himself with public opinion on the coronavirus. Trump is now promoting masks and he’s canceled the GOP convention in Jacksonville, Fla., while restarting his daily coronavirus briefings.
To address the nationwide protests, the president has used his executive authority to dispatch federal troops to Democratic-controlled cities experiencing demonstrations and incidences of violence.
Trump is gambling that voters — in particular the suburban voters that have moved away from the GOP since 2018 — will grow tired of discord in the streets and gravitate toward his demands for law and order.
The Trump campaign had planned to run almost exclusively on the economy but the coronavirus lockdown has weakened the president’s reelection argument on his signature issue."
metmike: Trumps numbers should have bottomed here based on the new strategy. The MSM won't be able to convince even more voters to join the never Trump club on NEW news(because the NEW news about Trump is now bullish for his prospects.....with his recent big changes that just make great sense and disarm the negative COVID narrative)
However, they will (for sure) dwell on the bearish OLD news and tell us relentlessly that his mishandling of COVID is why its so bad right now. Most sadly, they will continue to say there is no evidence that the protests have caused an increase in COVID and this subject will continue to be totally dominated by politics and because its SO incredibly sensitive, nobody wants to say anything bad about peaceful protesting because it could literally be the end of your career.
Opening up also caused alot of the increase but the pink graph below, shows the decline in new cases........until just after the protesting. Each state has unique circumstances but looking at CA, OR, WA and GA for instance, the protest fingerprint is unmistakeably huge, especially affecting the exact age of protesters and blacks(this is NO coincidence).
I mention that here because the COVID outcome, by itself is the main factor determining whether Trump gets elected or not. If it ever got out that protesting is responsible for such a massive amount of new cases, the current narrative that totally blames Trump would be damaged. Like with the proven, safe drug HCQ, that has been helping many patients and continues to be widely used by many doctors but was falsely portrayed as killing people because Trump came out for it...........As many of the cases as possible must be blamed on Trump's mishandling of COVID.
https://www.vox.com/21333964/covid-19-coronavirus-trump-briefing-today
:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/20105945/Screen_Shot_2020_07_22_at_9.23.35_AM.png)
My interpretation:
1. New tests are 4 times what they were less than 3 months ago. This is contributing to the new cases(detected).
2. New cases were going down thru May, the suddenly in the 2nd week of June, reversed and have accelerated higher.......now 3 times higher.......than what they were before the protesting. Yes, we were opening stuff up which is increasing rates but states NOT opening much that have lots of protesting, like CA are having some of the biggest increases. OR's rate is 6 times higher than the early June rate. New cases are double the peak in April!! Protest aged people and blacks have been the most affected.
3. Hospitalizations are a key number. They dropped to half the peak by mid June, then have spiked back up to the peak right now. So hospitalizations per case are about half of what they were in the Spring. Part of this is because many are minor cases that were not tested before and a big part of that is these are younger people.........the age of protesters that don't get as sick.
4. Deaths had dropped to something like 25% of those reported during the Spring peak. Those bottomed at the start of July and are slowly turning higher. So far, not showing the same huge increase higher that the other metrics have shown for weeks. This is likely because its more young people and we are finding effective treatments.
Interestingly, Rasmussen just showed his job approval as evenly split among likely voters between approval and disapproval, and Rasmussen is, IMO, the best survey out there.
Thanks Tim,
I hadn't looked at polls but those numbers strongly confirm that Trumps negative numbers have already bottomed.
Earlier this month, I was thinking something like a 2% chance of him winning because COVID and the MSM using COVID effectively were obliterating him for months, with no end in sight.......... but after suddenly seeing the new and much improved Trump recently, was wild guessing something like 10%(with expectations for massive adjustments based on new information).
This new information would have me increasing those wild guess odds.
What matters is not July 2020 or any other time frame. November 2020 counts 100%.
If all the stars line up(COVID, Law and order, Durham report, Biden looks very weak) and Trump peaks right then with his highest numbers ...........he can still win.
And you can bet the theme of that last sentence, defines his new campaign managers strategy.
When I type a statement like that, I feel like I'm reading the minds of readers.
When I was writing posts this Summer that stated my belief that Trumps chances to win were tiny and falling, Trump supporters were not happy with me, mcfarm especially.
Trump haters found this to be candy to their eyes.
So while typing the last post, that gives Trump some outside, comeback chances BASED ON FACTS, not what I personally WANT to see...........no doubt the perception will be the opposite.
Personally, though I will be voting for Trump because of the light years better and honest agenda(for America), I will not be upset when he loses because he will have brought the loss entirely on himself...........entirely and brought down the republicans because of his bad behavior.
Think of everything else being the same..............and Mike Pence running for president with most of the same agenda as Trump.........but saying things in a different manner. Being respectful and NOT divisive. Being very nice and likeable and disarming to critics vs mean and attacking them.
Pence vs Biden would be a landslide.
The main attack on Pence would be his Christian values and how they have, in the past caused him to support policies that discriminated against gays. He seems to have changed that...........I hope so because it would be a problem for me....... but the main attack on Trump............there are just too many to even try to list.
Trump the person is the main problem with Trump........his own worst enemy.
why would I upset MM? Did we not learn a thing from the last election? And have we not a learned a thing about rino's like George will? I would judge from both of these moments in time there is lots of good news for Trump and people who are on conservative when its convenient are going to be sad. Sorry Larry get prepared to be very sad and the country will be just fine if Trump trounces the dunce in the basement.
PS MM I believe you were saying Biden would never make it to the convention much more strongly than anything else to my memory.
"'MM I believe you were saying Biden would never make it to the convention much more strongly than anything else to my memory."
Good memory mcfarm!
For a couple of months earlier this year after observing Bidens failing mental sharpness and assuming the race would be closer than it is now, I speculated that there was a good chance for Biden to withdraw(for health reasons) and give his support/allegiance to Sanders.
But the negative impact from Trumps loser COVID strategy(including having a rally in OK-dumbest thing ever) allowed Bidens weaknesses to not be a factor.
The dems were smart. They let Trump destroy himself.........without distracting it with messages from their weak candidate. Stand aside and watch Trump obliterate Trump.
Had there been more Biden up front and people witnessed how bad he appears to be...........THEN, I think this strategy would make much more sense but they came up with an even better one.
Many things will change between now and November that can't be predicted.
Another element that I overlooked in the Sanders replacing weak Biden strategy is that the smart democrats HAVE ALREADY DONE THAT. Biden is being controlled by handlers, some are advisors from the far left that want THEIR political agenda as part of the Biden agenda. In turn, Sanders/AOC have a huge say in his platform. In other words, you don't actually need Bernie to get Bernie's agenda anymore..............you can now get Bernie by voting Biden.
So Biden the puppet and "not Donald Trump" choice, weakest candidate that I remember is not standing as an individual but has a "team" supporting(controlling) him. This means that we can still vote for Biden because we are really getting his "team", not just him.
BIDEN-SANDERS UNITY TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS
https://joebiden.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/UNITY-TASK-FORCE-RECOMMENDATIONS.pdf
mc & MM,
Dream on! Trump's credibility is long shot and I doubt seriously many astute folks are going to go back to Trump just because after several months he's suddenly changing his message to being more serious about COVID. It isn't tempting myself and others I've talked to in the least. We know better. Smarter folks know he's full of it/wishy washy/a habitual liar. We won't vote for a habitual liar. Trump imo is not coming back enough to be competitive.
Mc, If you want to talk about RINO, you're looking at one in Trump. He's an opportunist. You don't care though because you're close minded about the dunce in chief. Nothing short of him murdering someone would get you to change your mind imo.
mm: "Like with the proven, safe drug HCQ..."
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2019014
"Conclusions.
Among patients hospitalized with mild-to-moderate Covid-19, the use of hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, did not improve clinical status at 15 days as compared with standard care."
...some national regulatory agencies have authorized the use of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with this disease. However, observational studies have suggested no beneficial effect of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with Covid-19."
Trump is not a rino. Where he is conservative he is a strong conservative. On some things he is not at all. But he is sitting in the WH and has brought much good fortune to the US. Had we swayed much further left on the boarders, on the military, on china, yes even on Russia, trade deal fiasco's of the previous Adms {about 15 of those adm} ...in other word say what you will Trumps is a doer and puts America first,,,hell wx maybe that's why you have your panties in such a wad.
Thanks pj,
We've been down this road before.
Previously, it was about whether my being open minded about HCQ was justified because of the studies that came out like this one you provided a link to. One of them even claimed to have stopped the study because it was killing so many patients.
Sounded pretty bad and convincing alright but I remained steadfast at keeping and open mind(with zero consideration of what the clown had stated).........and I did my own research and found out why thousands of doctors continue to use it. They understand medicine and their priority is to save lives. This drug, with 100% certainty reduces inflammation(including in the lungs) which is a benefit to COVID patients. Its how it works..........and why its been used effectively for Lupus and other forms of arthritis to treat the inflammation.
Its also been taken by hundreds of millions of people for several decades(mainly for Malaria) with very few, if any side affects.
A couple of studies that suddenly contradict the REALITY are very suspect in my opinion. The reality always wins.
From your study:
"Our trial has several limitations. First, although the point estimate of effect suggests no major difference between the groups with respect to the primary outcome, the trial cannot definitively rule out either a substantial benefit of the trial drugs or a substantial harm. For the comparison between hydroxychloroquine and control, for example, our data are compatible with odds ratios as low as 0.69 and as high as 2.11. Second, the trial was not blinded. Third, despite intense efforts to maintain adherence to the assigned treatments, a lack of medications that were perceived as beneficial by clinicians and patients led to some protocol deviations. Fourth, the use of hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin was widespread among patients hospitalized with Covid-19 in participating hospitals. The enrollment of patients with no previous use of these medications was challenging, so we decided to enroll patients provided that their previous use since the onset of symptoms was limited to 24 hours."
metmike: In politically charged areas like this, especially climate science, I prefer to do my own research rather than to just believe what others show, especially if its presented as mainstream science that we all need to adhere to and not question.......that relates to an extremely politicized topic.
This is what I actually found and why doctors that understand it are widely using it:
https://arthritis-research.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13075-019-2040-6
SAA stimulation induced significant production of IL-1β in human neutrophils. SAA stimulation also induced NF-κB activation, pro-IL-1β mRNA expression, and NLRP3 protein expression in human neutrophils. HCQ pretreatment significantly inhibited the SAA-induced IL-1β production in human neutrophils, but did not affect the SAA-induced NF-κB activation, pro-IL-1β mRNA expression, and NLRP3 protein expression. Furthermore, SAA stimulation induced cleaved caspase-1 (p20) secretion from human neutrophils, and this release was suppressed by HCQ pretreatment.
Treatment with HCQ was associated with impaired production of IL-1β in SAA-stimulated human neutrophils without affecting the priming process of the NLRP3 inflammasome such as pro-IL-1β or NLRP3 induction. These findings suggest that HCQ affects the NLRP3 activation process, resulting in the impaired IL-1β production in human neutrophils, as representative innate immune cells.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
metmike: Instead of this medical benefit/knowledge being passed on, we get bogus studies like this one that came out earlier this year:
The hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) efficacy issue has generated a lot of debate globally as well. The Lancet study is now under severe criticism from more than 180 scientists worldwide for not releasing the data for an independent analysis outside.
The scientific community is furious seeing a poorly written and poorly executed study published in The Lancet that has not only received huge underserved publicity but also created a massive negative impact on the other judiciously planned clinical trials being conducted around the world. More than 100 scientists and clinicians have sent an open letter to The Lancet's editor, Richard Horton, and the paper's authors asking them many uncomfortable questions, but have failed to receive convincing answers from the authors.
The letter alleges that
Meanwhile, Professor Harvey Risch, MD, Epidemiologist from Yale University has recommended an early therapy with Hydroxychloroquine & Azithromycin in the early therapy for COVID-19. His study Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk Covid-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to the Pandemic Crisis has been published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
metmike: And the inconvenient result of this study below ignored by those that don't want to believe.
"The anti-malaria drug that President Trump touted as a possible treatment for coronavirus, hydroxychloroquine, successfully lowered the death rate among hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the most recent study of the drug.
The large-scale analysis, conducted by Henry Ford Health System, was published Thursday in the peer-reviewed International Journal of Infectious Diseases.
The study examined 2,541 patients who had been hospitalized in six hospitals between March 10 and May 2, 2020.
More than twenty-six percent (26.4%) of patients who did not receive hydroxychloroquine died.
But among those who received hydroxychloroquine, fewer than half that number — 13% — died.
More than 90% of the patients received hydroxychloroquine within 48 hours of admission to the hospital. Scientists say giving the drug early during illness may be a key to success.
The study’s authors also found one concern flagged in previous reports about hydroxychloroquine did not materialize: heart-related adverse events.
"The data here is clear that there was benefit to using [hydroxychloroquine] as a treatment for sick, hospitalized patients," said Dr. Steven Kalkanis of Henry Ford Health System.
The study scientists point out that other reports about hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for coronavirus that had less positive, mixed, or negative results studied different populations; administered hydroxychloroquine later during illness; used different doses, and/or were not peer-reviewed.
President Trump was widely criticized in the media for saying that if hydroxychloroquine proves to work in treating coronavirus, it could be a game changer.
In May, he told reporters that he, himself, took a course of the drug as a preventive measure after several White House officials were diaagnosed with Covid-19. Trump says he suffered no ill effects from hydroxychloroquine.
Henry Ford Health System is also studying 3,000 healthcare and frontline workers to see if hydroxychloroquine can prevent coronavirus. That study is titled: "Will Hydroxychloroquine Impede or Prevent COVID-19" or "WHIP COVID-19."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
metmike: And anybody can just cherry pick whatever study they want to support their position...........which is NOT what I'm doing. I'm not saying believe the last study at all because it shows what I want you to believe...........I didn't believe it and am skeptical of the results because they also used steroids on some patients that would have affected/helped them and altered the results.
I am
1. Showing you there is a huge group of REAL doctors using it still today on REAL patients and there are studies that support its use, like this last one.
2. But for me, in doing the homework in researching how the drug actually works to effectively diminish inflammation and knowing that hundreds of millions have been taking it safely for decades, tells me exactly why so many real experts........the medical doctors in touch with medicine that are trying to save their patients lives and don't give a darn about politics.......are prescribing it.....not because they are blinded by the clown (-:
3. When it comes to research and papers, most people would be shocked to know how much bias, politics and financial considerations can completely determine outcomes.
https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
Only a small fraction of physicians use plasma, but they highly rate it.
Doctors’ wide-spread use and high recognition of HCQ+AZ treatment against COVID-19 is strong evidence, and, possibly, conclusive proof of the treatment’s safety and effectiveness.
I just heard an interview of Joe Biden and two things came to mind:
1) He sounded smooth and lucid without the least evidence of dementia. I’m hoping that means the concerns about his mind going downhill are overblown. I realize he's very likely not as sharp as he was, say 5 years ago, but that's pretty normal for someone his age. Much of the overblowing if this is political BS coming from Trump supporters, He sounded so much better than the babbler in chief, Trump.
2) Biden was asked about his thoughts about how to deal with unnecessary police brutality and use of force. Not once did he even hint at defunding. He even stated that a large majority of cops are good. He very much respects the police as an honorable institution and he wants to keep it that way/protect it. His ideas are for national standards like no choke holds, more body cams, and more accountability of police departments as far as disciplining the bad cops.
3. With answers like this, little sign of actual dementia, and very smart folks and respectable conservatives like George Will voting for him, my chances of voting for Biden as opposed to a 3rd party or write-in are increasing again
By golly, maybe he could actually end up being that great unifying President that I’ve long thought he was capable of based on his decades of being a “work with the GOP” Senator.
mc & MM,
"Dream on!"
My posts are not based on dreams or hopes or emotions. I am just telling you as many objective facts as I can and being real.
When COVID was killing Trumps numbers thru early July, I kept dropping his chance of winning......down to 2%(my wild guess as this number is nothing more than speculative to express my view).
mcfarm and others did not like reading that but that was the reality.
Now Trump has turned his strategy around to one that WILL help him recover. It's an irrefutable fact. Not the amount of recovery but the strategy chance and what its likely to do for Trump. You may not like reading me saying anything positive about Trump and so, referring to it as a dream but my new wild guess of Trumps chances going up to 10%, meaning 90% chance of him being defeated still...............if that's a dream, then I must be wishing for Trump to lose.
This is why I use those numbers.............to make it clear using a numerical value to represent my mindset about Trumps numbers.
If I just stated something like "Trumps new tactics just put him back into the race" you could easily assume that I might think he has at least a 30% chance, possibly a 50% chance. I'm betting mcfarm thinks even higher than 50%.
I'm not speaking for mcfarm, other than to say that he thinks the chances of Trump winning are at least 6 times higher than what I think.
If you want to put us in the same category of dreaming, then you are not getting the right messages out from my posts. Let me try to help you out here so you will stop mis characterizing me.
My dream on the presidential race has been described several times, including earlier Sunday in this very thread........it would be Mike Pence running for president with Trumps agenda.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From above"
"So while typing the last post, that gives Trump some outside, comeback chances BASED ON FACTS, not what I personally WANT to see...........no doubt the perception will be the opposite.Personally, though I will be voting for Trump because of the light years better and honest agenda(for America), I will not be upset when he loses because he will have brought the loss entirely on himself...........entirely and brought down the republicans because of his bad behavior.
Think of everything else being the same..............and Mike Pence running for president with most of the same agenda as Trump.........but saying things in a different manner. Being respectful and NOT divisive. Being very nice and likeable and disarming to critics vs mean and attacking them.
Pence vs Biden would be a landslide.
The main attack on Pence would be his Christian values and how they have, in the past caused him to support policies that discriminated against gays. He seems to have changed that...........I hope so because it would be a problem for me....... but the main attack on Trump............there are just too many to even try to list.
Trump the person is the main problem with Trump........his own worst enemy."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Metmike: How do you interpret this as me dreaming of Trump being elected?????
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
With regards to Biden, I also mentioned to Tim that the surprise he and others might get is a debate where he holds his own, though I personally think that Biden has clearly shown that he is not qualified to do the job of president for the next 4 years. Regardless of if he has a couple of good debates or that you heard him speak on one night and he sounded good...............but this is just my opinion from observations that can't be proven.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/56651/
Tim, Here is a surprise you may be overlooking.
Peoples expectations for Biden will be very low. The less that you like him, the lower the expectations. As a result, people here expect a disaster for him. Give him very little chance of holding his own. Even his supporters with higher expectations have dialed in a few gaffs into his performance........it defines him today and it was expected when people voted for him because they think he has the best chance to beat Donald Trump. He won the nomination based almost entirely on the belief that Biden has the best chance to beat Trump.
Think about that mentality. Everybody that has it, is already a Biden vote. This is the explanation for him being the nominee.
But here is the surprise, no matter how bad Biden is, we know never Trumpers will not care 1 iota about his mental condition. Trump supporters will not care either. What has the potential to matter is the low double digit % that might care...........if its really extreme. That group already knows that Biden can't think like he once did. No way do they or even Bidens flock expect a flawless performance...............so Biden will not need to have that. If he has just a few minor gaffs but sounds good the rest of the time, it will be a victory, possibly big victory for Biden. His detractors will point to the minor gaffs as evidence he shouldn't be president. Everybody else, including many using that to decide on Joe or not will think..............."that wasn't so bad" or "that wasn't as bad as one side keeps telling us."
And no matter what happens, the MSM will downplay the gaffs and use sound bites of Biden's sharp moments.......and there will be plenty of those to play.
It is conceivable that Biden could have a good night and surprise everybody. Somebody in his condition has ups and downs on the way down and when they are in up mode, in this early stage, they can be their old selves.
If that happens, game over for the narrative that Bidens cerebral functioning disqualifies him."
And like I stated/predicted earlier........when I was dropping Trumps chances of winning to near 0 earlier this month, his supporters reacted, now when I increase his chances...............all the way up to a whopping 10%, right on cue, his detractors react.
"I just heard an interview of Joe Biden"
Larry,
Do you have a link for us to listen to the interview?
They seem to be hard to come by (-:
Fox News host Chris Wallace said Sunday that presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s team told him the former vice president is “not available” for an interview amid criticism from conservatives and reporters that the former vice president avoids press scrutiny.
Wallace conducted a much-heralded interview with President Trump last week in which he frequently fact-checked him and cornered him into making several shocking declarations–such as that he wouldn’t commit to accepting the election results in November.
“Let Biden sit through an interview like this, he’ll be on the ground crying for mommy. He’ll say, 'Mommy, mommy, please take me home,'” Trump taunted in the interview.
Wallace later told colleague Bret Baier, “The fact is, the president is out there. He’s out there in this broiling heat with me for an hour, he took all the questions. You can like his answers or dislike them but he had answers and Joe Biden hasn’t faced that kind of scrutiny, hasn’t faced that kind of exposure.”
Wallace said on Fox News Sunday that he requested an interview with Biden this week, but that the former vice president’s team told Wallace he’s “not available.”
“We’ll keep asking every week,” Wallace declared before signing off.
metmike: Chris Wallace is very fair, objective, honest and professional. I can't think of a better reporter.
MM,
I apologize and should have addressed the “Dream on” to just McFarm. However, I still think that even your optimism to raise his chances from 2% to 10% merely based on his more serious approach to COVID is too optimistic <G> based on my feeling that few will fall for the political ploy. Folks are getting smarter about how Trump is.
Links to recent Biden interview (7 days ago...I just saw it for first time yesterday): yes it is a friendly interview from MSNBC’s Joy Reid, but I was still pleased with Biden’s being lucid as well as his answers regarding the police. I don’t have link to full interview by Joy Reid:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xX8VVVR-5Rs
https://www.msnbc.com/the-reidout/watch/biden-says-four-black-women-are-on-his-vp-list-88032325600
to go along with that picture and joke there another going around. Has Biden with another of his numerous nonsensical statements and says "yes things happen, and bad things happen when you are stupid and make bad decisions" just think when all the comes out with biden in bed whit the ukraine, china, notorious racists.....you know all the things they tried to hang on Trump which proved false.
pj,
That was the funniest thing that I've seen the last few days at least.
Thanks Larry!
Wonderful response. Sorry that I felt compelled to confront you so assertively but I view the current situation in our country as more of a nightmare(not all from Trump but plenty enough for me to wish anybody but Trump were president...............but with his platform/agenda) so to have this described as a dream of mine was just too far off course to not jump on.
We can both be real and honest using numerical values to represent opinions. Like 10% chance of Trump being elected. Most importantly, there should be minimal confusion in the interpretation by others.
mcfarm told us that my guess for him thinking that Trumps chances are at least 6 times higher than my 10%.
This is very consistent with everything that he says. He thinks Trumps chances are better than Bidens.
You think that 10% is too high but probably liked the 2% guess.
When was the last time that it rained when there was a 2% chance of rain (-:
There are things that I can't possibly know which are important to accurately gauge what Trumps real chances are here. That's not what I'm trying to do..........be a presidential election predicting guru that has some skill.
I have no great skills for this.........other than the fact that I see all the great things about Trump that are the only things that one side wants to see.............and I see all the really bad things about Trump, which is all the other side wants to see.
Speaking of weather earlier, what if we had a Trump Election Ensemble(-:
The individual ensembles would all fall into basically 2 completely opposite camps. We all know that in weather models, taking the average of all the ensembles, is almost always the best. By far the most consistent/dependable.
However, a Trump election ensemble average would average the 2 extremes to something fairly close to the middle(the extremes would cancel each other out).
This would appear to not be a very good indicator....based on my view of 10% chance for him to be elected(which is much closer to you).
Of course applying a weather model ensemble average that tries to dampen out the extreme/outliers makes sense.
With a political election, the result CAN'T be the average. We don't get BIden for 2.5 years and Trump for 1.5 years if they are close. It's winner take all. All or nothing.
So with the individual predictions in the Trump election model, one extreme will be 100% right, the other 100% wrong.
Just mentioning that for fun, nothing serious intended.
Thanks much Larry!
I thought Biden sounded pretty convincing in the first video. Communicated flawlessly and with passion.
However, a 4 minute, limited soft ball interview performance is an entirely different ballgame than a presidential debate.........and that is really nothing compared to actually doing the job of president.
For me, seeing dozens and dozens of videos of him being confused is very concerning.
He has early dementia. It would be tough, even for the greatest and best presidents of all time to be president with worsening dementia.
Dementia is progressive. Maybe with the best meds, his will progress very slowly but the biological clock that was set years ago for Joe Bidens brain will keep ticking.
It's possible, that Joe Biden being a figure head/puppet controlled by handlers and others is very appealing to many in the party.
One thing that they all agree on.........they want the opposite of Trump.
Trump is a control freak. His way or the highway sort of guy. Fires people that cross his agenda.
A Biden with dementia would be the complete opposite............being controlled. Going with the agenda of the most powerful in his party.
The Bernie Sanders and AOC fingerprint in his agenda is showing up big time already.
So a weak president like Biden may be exactly what some want.
It would certainly be advantageous and favored with those pushing the cultural revolution.
MM cultural revolution? At this point it seems way past that.
We have antifa and avowed communist/socialist organization joined with blm an organization that started with the fake prosecution of police with the travon marte case and so far removed from its roots its unrecognizable today in an attempt to bring down this country from within. Blm has fruadelenty accumulated some 1.5 b in its treasure chest and it sure feels like all the shake downs jesse Jackson pulled for years and walked away free as a bird. These people have been very outspoken about ridding our country of its boarders, its police, its law and order, its capitalism, its military, hell even our justice system so I cannot help but believe "cultural revolution" is like calling the most deadly snake on earth "a harmless pet"
mm: "He has early dementia."
No big Biden fan, for years thought he was sort of a ding bat. But to me there could well be some considerable truth to https://niemanreports.org/articles/biden-stutter/
'No big Biden fan, for years thought he was sort of a ding bat. But to me there could well be some considerable truth to https://niemanreports.org/articles/biden-stutter/"
Thanks pj,
I assume that you must not have gone back to look at those ding bat years to compare Biden then, with Biden today.
Here's some vintage Biden then so that you can compare..........was he stuttering? Confused? Acting like a ding bat?
No need to show you Biden now...........you can see for yourself its not nearly the same Joe.
Most people lose a mental step when they get to Biden's age. Nothing unnatural and nothing to be ashamed about. However, people running for the office of president should not have clearly lost several steps in just the last several years.
One side is trying to convince us that Joe has always been like this..........to assure us that there won't be additional cognitive declines that come with dementia.
Joe has NOT always been like this.
The old Joe was sharp as a tack and had gifted communication and speaking skills. See for yourself. This was a man that was qualified to lead the country as president.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_v00iGJCLY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1j0FS0Z6ho
He actually got busted lying about his credentials and for plagiarizing which ended his first presidential campaign above but he had lots of fire and was very effective at projecting powerful messages. When he speaks now, at times he struggles to find the right words and for me watching/listening, I feel uncomfortable because he seems VERY uncomfortable.
I would have voted for him in 1988 if he had been the nominee.
Joe Biden is in cognitive decline as evidenced by the speeches above that allow us to see the Joe before cognitive decline to compare with today.
Can he still have good debates?
Sure and with low expectations, he will be allowed a few gaffs and still have the MSM interpreting it as Joe BIden not in cognitive decline.
But he clearly is.
My biggest concern and question is, "What will be the rate of his continuing cognitive decline the next 4 years? It's possible that it will be very slow and he is not that much worse than he is now.
But that should never be a question we seriously ask about somebody that makes it to the ballet in November. If you are already in cognitive decline of any type, it should automatically disqualify you from holding the most important office in the land................... which has the requirement of being at the top of your cognitive game.
I agree a lot of change in his ability to articulate. Maybe hairsplitting, but it's possible to me that in conjunction with mental decline, age has also made it harder for him fight his innate tendency to stutter/stammer.
Thanks pj!
Just a matter of the degree of the decline that we differ on and that will always remain and I could be proven wrong.
After he is elected, his performance will be the only thing to determine that.
Speeches like that are why I always liked Joe Biden in the past.
Liked him alot.
That Joe Biden is long gone.
