Biden Transition Thread

[GMDino]

(11-19-2020, 03:17 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Me and a student were talking about the recent decision to make 3rd quarter virtual. I taught him in government last year and now have him for my electives. He was a big Trump supporter. When we did projects on presidents last year, he chose Obama and graded him an "F" lol 

We were discussing the vaccines and the need to get those out so we can get back as soon as its safe, because no one likes virtual.

I always keep things neutral in class, and, particularly with kids who are conservative, do not want them to be discouraged for their political views when they're in the minority of the class. I mentioned that my one concern is that if there is a delayed transition, it may take longer to get vaccines out. Surprisingly he said, "yea, I wanted him to win but Trump lost so he needs to not act like a baby about it." I responded "Yea, i think if he spends his last two months in office working with Biden to help push the vaccines out, people will remember him better in the future than if he spends it not working with Biden". 

Interesting hearing his take on it. 

Wait...

You mean public schools aren't simply liberal indoctrination buildings?!?!  

All seriousness aside I've been happy to see some conservatives understand and disagree with what Trump is doing.  Gives me a glimmer of hope.

[Belsnickel]

(11-13-2020, 11:51 PM)Benton Wrote: McConnell's in a rough spot, and I don't blame him for saying Trump should take his time. McConnell is trying to keep the party together after this. It wasn't like Trump was just a GOP darling, he was an outsider who wedged himself into what was supposed to be a great time to be a republican traditionalist: Obama was on his way out, the economy was on the rebound, there was a majority to pass just about any legislation you wanted and people were unhappy with Obamacare. 

Then Trump showed up and punted the party platform, saying things GOP donors weren't really interested in investing in. Donors didn't want tariffs or a wall, they like cheap goods and labor. They didn't really want the 'yeah, Nazis are good people' message. 

So now McConnell's got to try keep the voters who fell in love with Trump, but also try to steer the party back to tax breaks for the rich and deregulating healthcare and environmental protections, the stuff the donors are interested in.

So I get McConnell.

I don't really get guys like Graham. Going all in on a fringe candidate? Seems like a good way to end up on the outside after his party settles down.

I recognize that this is the reasoning, but I still don't get it. What is going on right now in the GOP is entirely party-over-country, and it's disgusting.

[BmorePat87]

Biden’s best bet moving forward is to tell McConnell “I have no intention of having my DOJ pursue charges against the outgoing administration, but that act of unity will require you to not hold up any of my appointments. They all get a hearing and a vote”.

[CKwi88]

(11-19-2020, 10:31 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Biden’s best bet moving forward is to tell McConnell “I have no intention of having my DOJ pursue charges against the outgoing administration, but that act of unity will require you to not hold up any of my appointments. They all get a hearing and a vote”.

Yeah given what the GOP has gotten away with for the better part of the last decade with zero accountability I really see no reason for McConnell to play ball at all. He'll obstruct for the next 4 years, and 74 million million people won't give a damn in 2 years.

[Benton]

(11-19-2020, 10:31 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Biden’s best bet moving forward is to tell McConnell “I have no intention of having my DOJ pursue charges against the outgoing administration, but that act of unity will require you to not hold up any of my appointments. They all get a hearing and a vote”.

My guess is it'll be a swap on something like tax cuts for healthcare.

The GOP wants to keep tax cuts in place. The Dems do, too, but that's down list. On the flip side, the Dems want something positive on healthcare. The GOP does too, but they can't go all in because they've spent the last decade equating healthcare reform to socialism. 

I think Biden and McConnell will work out something between those two issues so they can both site a win.

[BmorePat87]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/23/politics/joe-biden-foreign-policy-national-security-cabinet/index.html

Sec of DHS: Alejandro Mayorkas, former dep sec of DHS. First Latino Secretary of DHS

DNI: Avril Haines, former deputy national security adviser. First women as DNI

Special Presidential Envoy on Climate: John Kerry

[BmorePat87]

Sec of State: Antony Blinken, former Dep Sec of State and Dep National Security Advisor

UN Ambassador: Linda Thomas-Greenfield, former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs

National Security Advisor: Jake Sullivan, former Deputy Chief of Staff at the Department of State and National Security Advisor to the Vice President


These picks all have one thing in common: massive experience in their role

[BigPapaKain]

(11-23-2020, 06:07 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: These picks all have one thing in common: massive experience in their role

Would you say they're some of the best people, the smartest people?

[fredtoast]

(11-19-2020, 06:45 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I recognize that this is the reasoning, but I still don't get it. What is going on right now in the GOP is entirely party-over-country, and it's disgusting.

It is shocking how some of them are cutting their own throats.

The Republican Party actually did great in this election.  They gained multiple seats in the House and I believe they will hold onto the Senate.

Just think how toxic Trump has to be to lose the election as an incumbent when his party did so well.  I doubt that has ever happened before.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-24-2020, 12:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It is shocking how some of them are cutting their own throats.

The Republican Party actually did great in this election.  They gained multiple seats in the House and I believe they will hold onto the Senate.

Just think how toxic Trump has to be to lose the election as an incumbent when his party did so well.  I doubt that has ever happened before.

That's part of it, the other part is how toxic the Democratic brand has become for a large swathe of voters.  

[masonbengals fan]

You are both right.

[fredtoast]

(11-24-2020, 01:30 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: That's part of it, the other part is how toxic the Democratic brand has become for a large swathe of voters.  

I don't see what that has to do with Republicans backing Trump even when it is bad for their own party.

If they want to take full advantage of the problems with the Democrats then they need to distance themselves from Trump.   I know the incumbent pretty much always gets the nomination of his party, but based on the results of this election I think the Republicans could have won the White House with a candidate who did not act like a teenage twitter troll.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-24-2020, 03:02 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't see what that has to do with Republicans backing Trump even when it is bad for their own party.

It doesn't.  It has to do with your statement about how toxic Trump had to be to lose when the GOP did very well overall during this election.

Quote:If they want to take full advantage of the problems with the Democrats then they need to distance themselves from Trump.   I know the incumbent pretty much always gets the nomination of his party, but based on the results of this election I think the Republicans could have won the White House with a candidate who did not act like a teenage twitter troll.

Maybe, but irrelevant at this point.  I think the key takeaway is that the GOP is making huge inroads that were thought impossible two years, hell two months, ago.  The pro-criminal/anti-law enforcement position of the Democratic party is going to get them massacred in two years and likely again in four.  They bought into this "defund the police" movement wholesale and aren't going to be able to extricate themselves from it anytime soon, not without major turnover.

[BmorePat87]

(11-24-2020, 03:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It doesn't.  It has to do with your statement about how toxic Trump had to be to lose when the GOP did very well overall during this election.


Maybe, but irrelevant at this point.  I think the key takeaway is that the GOP is making huge inroads that were thought impossible two years, hell two months, ago.  The pro-criminal/anti-law enforcement position of the Democratic party is going to get them massacred in two years and likely again in four.  They bought into this "defund the police" movement wholesale and aren't going to be able to extricate themselves from it anytime soon, not without major turnover.

Except Congressional Democrats do not have this position. Joe Biden does not have this position. 

You can mention then when discussing the success of the GOP in making voters believe this is their position, trying to accuse fringe groups of being representative of liberalism as a whole, but it is not the actual policy being supported by those in a position to make change at a state or federal level. 

[fredtoast]

(11-24-2020, 03:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:  The pro-criminal/anti-law enforcement position of the Democratic party is going to get them massacred in two years and likely again in four.  They bought into this "defund the police" movement wholesale and aren't going to be able to extricate themselves from it anytime soon, not without major turnover.

If it was going to massacre them then it would have happened in this election.

When yu say they have bought into "defund the police" what exactly do you mean?  Do you mean the Democratic party is in favor of eliminating all law enforcement?  Or do you think they are just in favor of police reform?

Right now too many people have no clue what they really mean because all they have heard is the message from the right wing echo chamber ("pro-criminal"   ).  Over the next two years it will be more clear what they really want when they actually start implementing specific policy.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-24-2020, 04:07 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Except Congressional Democrats do not have this position. Joe Biden does not have this position.

Some Congressional Democrats don't.  Some very prominent ones absolutely do.  I am aware that Biden does not personally believe this, but we'll see how much he'll be able to avoid it. 

Quote:You can mention then when discussing the success of the GOP in making voters believe this is their position, trying to accuse fringe groups of being representative of liberalism as a whole, but it is not the actual policy being supported by those in a position to make change at a state or federal level. 

Federal, maybe.  Absolutely not at the state level in some states, my own for starters.

(11-24-2020, 04:12 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If it was going to massacre them then it would have happened in this election.

It did.

Quote:When yu say they have bought into "defund the police" what exactly do you mean?  Do you mean the Democratic party is in favor of eliminating all law enforcement?  Or do you think they are just in favor of police reform?

Depends on the member.

Quote:Right now too many people have no clue what they really mean because all they have heard is the message from the right wing echo chamber ("pro-criminal"   ).  Over the next two years it will be more clear what they really want when they actually start implementing specific policy.

Your use of the term "right wing echo chamber" became stale several weeks ago.  It's also an obvious attempt to dismiss any argument being made as that wholly unsupported by anything other than the fringe right.  In short, it's clearly not a tactic designed with an open and honest discussion in mind.  You are correct that the next two years will be telling.  If the current rise in crime rates continues, and I believe it will, then there's going to be hell to pay.

[BmorePat87]

(11-24-2020, 04:25 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Some Congressional Democrats don't.  Some very prominent ones absolutely do.  I am aware that Biden does not personally believe this, but we'll see how much he'll be able to avoid it. 


Federal, maybe.  Absolutely not at the state level in some states, my own for starters.


It did.



Depends on the member.


Your use of the term "right wing echo chamber" became stale several weeks ago.  It's also an obvious attempt to dismiss any argument being made as that wholly unsupported by anything other than the fringe right.  In short, it's clearly not a tactic designed with an open and honest discussion in mind.  You are correct that the next two years will be telling.  If the current rise in crime rates continues, and I believe it will, then there's going to be hell to pay.

Neither Chuck Schumer nor Nancy Pelosi do, and both were just voted on by their colleagues to remain the top Democrats in their respective chambers. 

Your AOC's and the squad may, but your rank and file do not. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-24-2020, 04:44 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Neither Chuck Schumer nor Nancy Pelosi do, and both were just voted on by their colleagues to remain the top Democrats in their respective chambers. 

Your AOC's and the squad may, but your rank and file do not. 

Again, largely true, but what's true isn't important, what is perceived to be true is important.  AOC and her cronies get a lot of media attention and have attached the party to this movement, whether the old hands like it or not.  They're now between a rock and a hard place, they either have to placate a howling mob or have them turn on them or they have to further alienate moderate voters, who just cost them big time in the last election.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

BTW, here's Pelosi and Schumer not on the bandwagon on this issue.

[BmorePat87]

(11-24-2020, 04:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Again, largely true, but what's true isn't important, what is perceived to be true is important.  AOC and her cronies get a lot of media attention and have attached the party to this movement, whether the old hands like it or not.  They're now between a rock and a hard place, they either have to placate a howling mob or have them turn on them or they have to further alienate moderate voters, who just cost them big time in the last election.

Sure, I suggested that the perception differed from reality in my first post. I don't see their agenda changing to match the perception based on the actions they have taken over the last 6 months.