Nobody talks about Biden anymore

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hate to break it to you, but the CEO being on autopilot is a symbol of a well oiled machine. Many, many CEOs work less than 20 hours a week because they’ve hired competent staff and established efficient processes that allow the business to run without their constant oversight. It is a sign of success. Have you ever owned or run a business? Or have you always been a paper pusher moonlighting as a keyboard warrior?

It’s August when most of DC is in vacation mode. And he is just recovering from Covid. Chill out. He’s not running for president anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now you understand why he didn’t announce he wasn’t running for reelection earlier. Instant lame duck.

He still should have done so, months ago. A year ago, preferably.
NP

+1000 would have served the Dems well in swing states if Harris were nominated through the typical primary process.

[Anonymous]

Proof this was a right wing conspiracy to slander him. He’s just trucking along being a decent human being and even handed President like I’ve always known him to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Proof this was a right wing conspiracy to slander him. He’s just trucking along being a decent human being and even handed President like I’ve always known him to be.

Good grief.
Yeah.... sure..... his debate performance was a right wing conspiracy.
The fact that Nancy Pelosi and others forced him out was a right wing conspiracy.

You people love to gaslight the public. Over and over and over again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hate to break it to you, but the CEO being on autopilot is a symbol of a well oiled machine. Many, many CEOs work less than 20 hours a week because they’ve hired competent staff and established efficient processes that allow the business to run without their constant oversight. It is a sign of success. Have you ever owned or run a business? Or have you always been a paper pusher moonlighting as a keyboard warrior?

You cannot possibly be serious.
"CEO on autopilot." Good God. The man has had 3 events all week - two of them phone calls. You call this "autopilot?"

And, no - many, many CEOS do NOT work 20 hours a week. Successful CEOs work many more hours than that.
And, being the US president requires a helluvalot more than a couple hours a week.

Just stop trying to make excuses for Joe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hate to break it to you, but the CEO being on autopilot is a symbol of a well oiled machine. Many, many CEOs work less than 20 hours a week because they’ve hired competent staff and established efficient processes that allow the business to run without their constant oversight. It is a sign of success. Have you ever owned or run a business? Or have you always been a paper pusher moonlighting as a keyboard warrior?

You cannot possibly be serious.
"CEO on autopilot." Good God. The man has had 3 events all week - two of them phone calls. You call this "autopilot?"

And, no - many, many CEOS do NOT work 20 hours a week. Successful CEOs work many more hours than that.
And, being the US president requires a helluvalot more than a couple hours a week.

Just stop trying to make excuses for Joe.

Tell me you’re a career paper pusher without telling me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now you understand why he didn’t announce he wasn’t running for reelection earlier. Instant lame duck.

He still should have done so, months ago. A year ago, preferably.
NP

+1000 would have served the Dems well in swing states if Harris were nominated through the typical primary process.

Y'all don't get it. If there had been an open primary, it 1) would have made Biden a lame duck during the time the Dems were fighting for funding for Ukraine and Israel 2) split the Biden coalition prompting the "dems in disarray" headlines as progressives, liberals, moderates and Ind/GOP never Trumpers fought each other over the delegates and a winner all while Trump just kicked back like he did for the couple of days before Harris consolidated after Biden's announcement.

Sure, it wasn't the most open and transparent process, but really, who else was poised to inherit the war chest and infrastructure than Harris? Personally I would have preferred a Whitmer/Beshear ticket, but not if it was going to come with factions of the party threatening to stay home.

This was a much better result for the party and more importantly, the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hate to break it to you, but the CEO being on autopilot is a symbol of a well oiled machine. Many, many CEOs work less than 20 hours a week because they’ve hired competent staff and established efficient processes that allow the business to run without their constant oversight. It is a sign of success. Have you ever owned or run a business? Or have you always been a paper pusher moonlighting as a keyboard warrior?

You cannot possibly be serious.
"CEO on autopilot." Good God. The man has had 3 events all week - two of them phone calls. You call this "autopilot?"

And, no - many, many CEOS do NOT work 20 hours a week. Successful CEOs work many more hours than that.
And, being the US president requires a helluvalot more than a couple hours a week.

Just stop trying to make excuses for Joe.

Tell me you’re a career paper pusher without telling me.

You have no idea who I am or what I do.
You clearly also have no idea of what a successful CEO does or how much work they put in.
I am betting you are a government employee.

Look at Joe's schedule for the week. This is NOT the schedule for the actual president of the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now you understand why he didn’t announce he wasn’t running for reelection earlier. Instant lame duck.

He still should have done so, months ago. A year ago, preferably.
NP

+1000 would have served the Dems well in swing states if Harris were nominated through the typical primary process.

Y'all don't get it. If there had been an open primary, it 1) would have made Biden a lame duck during the time the Dems were fighting for funding for Ukraine and Israel 2) split the Biden coalition prompting the "dems in disarray" headlines as progressives, liberals, moderates and Ind/GOP never Trumpers fought each other over the delegates and a winner all while Trump just kicked back like he did for the couple of days before Harris consolidated after Biden's announcement.

Sure, it wasn't the most open and transparent process, but really, who else was poised to inherit the war chest and infrastructure than Harris? Personally I would have preferred a Whitmer/Beshear ticket, but not if it was going to come with factions of the party threatening to stay home.

This was a much better result for the party and more importantly, the country.

Keep telling yourself that.
What the nation saw was a candidate being selected by a few powerful people in the party. And, once that was decided, there was no way in hell any Democrat who wants to advance their career would challenge that decision - you don't buck the party elites by challenging a black female candidate.
And, despite the fact that just weeks before selecting Kamala, people were seriously talking about swapping her out of another VP because she has been so ineffective, these party elites knew the war chest was hers. So, the decision was made to select her and work feverishly to remake her into someone the voters would like. You see, if the party elites sing her praises, the media will sing her praises, and the Democratic voters will fall in line.

This whole process has not been organic. It has been planned, contrived, and executed by those in power. And, the Democratic voters have fallen in line, as always. And, they will keep her away from the media as long as possible so that the "remake" will translate to votes.
We can call her the "Stepford Wife" candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hate to break it to you, but the CEO being on autopilot is a symbol of a well oiled machine. Many, many CEOs work less than 20 hours a week because they’ve hired competent staff and established efficient processes that allow the business to run without their constant oversight. It is a sign of success. Have you ever owned or run a business? Or have you always been a paper pusher moonlighting as a keyboard warrior?

You cannot possibly be serious.
"CEO on autopilot." Good God. The man has had 3 events all week - two of them phone calls. You call this "autopilot?"

And, no - many, many CEOS do NOT work 20 hours a week. Successful CEOs work many more hours than that.
And, being the US president requires a helluvalot more than a couple hours a week.

Just stop trying to make excuses for Joe.

Tell me you’re a career paper pusher without telling me.

You have no idea who I am or what I do.
You clearly also have no idea of what a successful CEO does or how much work they put in.
I am betting you are a government employee.

Look at Joe's schedule for the week. This is NOT the schedule for the actual president of the US.

Which President would you like to compare his schedule to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hate to break it to you, but the CEO being on autopilot is a symbol of a well oiled machine. Many, many CEOs work less than 20 hours a week because they’ve hired competent staff and established efficient processes that allow the business to run without their constant oversight. It is a sign of success. Have you ever owned or run a business? Or have you always been a paper pusher moonlighting as a keyboard warrior?

You cannot possibly be serious.
"CEO on autopilot." Good God. The man has had 3 events all week - two of them phone calls. You call this "autopilot?"

And, no - many, many CEOS do NOT work 20 hours a week. Successful CEOs work many more hours than that.
And, being the US president requires a helluvalot more than a couple hours a week.

Just stop trying to make excuses for Joe.

Tell me you’re a career paper pusher without telling me.

You have no idea who I am or what I do.
You clearly also have no idea of what a successful CEO does or how much work they put in.
I am betting you are a government employee.

Look at Joe's schedule for the week. This is NOT the schedule for the actual president of the US.

Which President would you like to compare his schedule to?

Any of them. Most presidents do not routinely have 3-day weekends. Joe routinely does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now you understand why he didn’t announce he wasn’t running for reelection earlier. Instant lame duck.

He still should have done so, months ago. A year ago, preferably.
NP

+1000 would have served the Dems well in swing states if Harris were nominated through the typical primary process.

Y'all don't get it. If there had been an open primary, it 1) would have made Biden a lame duck during the time the Dems were fighting for funding for Ukraine and Israel 2) split the Biden coalition prompting the "dems in disarray" headlines as progressives, liberals, moderates and Ind/GOP never Trumpers fought each other over the delegates and a winner all while Trump just kicked back like he did for the couple of days before Harris consolidated after Biden's announcement.

Sure, it wasn't the most open and transparent process, but really, who else was poised to inherit the war chest and infrastructure than Harris? Personally I would have preferred a Whitmer/Beshear ticket, but not if it was going to come with factions of the party threatening to stay home.

This was a much better result for the party and more importantly, the country.

Keep telling yourself that.
What the nation saw was a candidate being selected by a few powerful people in the party. And, once that was decided, there was no way in hell any Democrat who wants to advance their career would challenge that decision - you don't buck the party elites by challenging a black female candidate.
And, despite the fact that just weeks before selecting Kamala, people were seriously talking about swapping her out of another VP because she has been so ineffective, these party elites knew the war chest was hers. So, the decision was made to select her and work feverishly to remake her into someone the voters would like. You see, if the party elites sing her praises, the media will sing her praises, and the Democratic voters will fall in line.

This whole process has not been organic. It has been planned, contrived, and executed by those in power. And, the Democratic voters have fallen in line, as always. And, they will keep her away from the media as long as possible so that the "remake" will translate to votes.
We can call her the "Stepford Wife" candidate.

Do you have a point...or are you just lashing out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hate to break it to you, but the CEO being on autopilot is a symbol of a well oiled machine. Many, many CEOs work less than 20 hours a week because they’ve hired competent staff and established efficient processes that allow the business to run without their constant oversight. It is a sign of success. Have you ever owned or run a business? Or have you always been a paper pusher moonlighting as a keyboard warrior?

You cannot possibly be serious.
"CEO on autopilot." Good God. The man has had 3 events all week - two of them phone calls. You call this "autopilot?"

And, no - many, many CEOS do NOT work 20 hours a week. Successful CEOs work many more hours than that.
And, being the US president requires a helluvalot more than a couple hours a week.

Just stop trying to make excuses for Joe.

Tell me you’re a career paper pusher without telling me.

You have no idea who I am or what I do.
You clearly also have no idea of what a successful CEO does or how much work they put in.
I am betting you are a government employee.

Look at Joe's schedule for the week. This is NOT the schedule for the actual president of the US.

Which President would you like to compare his schedule to?

Any of them. Most presidents do not routinely have 3-day weekends. Joe routinely does.

It seems to be the new normal. The GOP is running the guy in dead last.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:(1)Can Harris thread the needle on immigration and the Middle East if Biden is mentioned?

(2)If Biden is truly incapable of continuing and the powers that be do not invoke the amendment to remove him from office for health reasons, will that failure fall on her? Why isn’t anyone talking about Biden and the ME situation that seems to be imploding.

1. Harris has already declared that she’ll push the bipartisan immigration reform bill through. All she has to do is keep reminding voters that republicans blocked it on Trump’s order. She’ll remind voters that Biden, who expected this bill to pass, issued a proclamation on June 4 under Immigration and Nationality Act sections 212(f) and 215(a) suspending entry of noncitizens who cross the Southern border into the United States unlawfully.

2. There is no reason to remove Biden for health reasons. He did what he had to do and made it very clear he will finish his term. He’s already executive ordering the crap out of everything he can. No one is going to invoke the amendment. Johnson will try, but lose. Please read up on the 25th amendment. Biden, his closest advisor and chief strategist + Harris were his only trusted trio in the 24 hour period when his letter to step down and finish his term was drafted and released to the public. You should understand how stealth his timing was. It was legally sound, set Harris up with delegates, campaign funds, and has crippled Trump’s strategy.

1. All Republicans have to do is to remind voters that Kamala Harris was the border czar and for 3 1/2 years the border has been in crisis and this administration has done nothing to prevent the entry of millions of illegal aliens. Then, there is the whole scandal with the CHNV parole program with all the fraud that this administration was illegally operating..... that is another reminder of how bad she has been for immigration. And, having Walz as her #2 does not help with her immigration problems. You know... the whole "give the illegals a ladder" thing and the sanctuary state policy.

So, no - she cannot escape the deplorable record on immigration.

2. She has failed when it comes to Biden and his cognitive decline. We have known for months there were issues. But, she has repeatedly said he was fine, and sharp and that there was no problem. She was either (a) lying or (b) too clueless to recognize the decline. Either one is bad.

And, the ME is a dumpster fire thanks, in part, to Biden, et al.

Are you a clown? Seriously. SHE WAS NOT THE BORDER CZAR! LOOK AT SOMETHING OTHER THAN FOX OR BREITBART!

Biden was negotiating the release of hostages while ill with Covid an hour before he released his statement that he wouldn't be running. Did you see the hot mess express coming to you live from Mar-A-Lardo today? You have no right to speak about cognitive decline.

Seriously, I think you people need your heads examined.

Screaming at and insulting voters is usually not a great way to bring them over to your point of view. Including the undecided bystanders watching you scream at voters.

You’re also arguing in bad faith. Just like the president’s actual mental fitness, the truth is irrelevant: nearly all of the American public and a fair chunk of the rest of the world heard “border czar” when her role was announced, and that’s what they believe. You have to know that.

I posted the link to the Time magazine article upthread, which I'm sure no one is going to bother to read. So I'll excerpt one relevant bit of information.

"In fact, Harris was never put in charge of the border or immigration policy. Nor was she involved in overseeing law-enforcement efforts or guiding the federal response to the crisis. Her mandate was much narrower: to focus on examining and improving the underlying conditions in the Northern Triangle of Central America—El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras—which has been racked by decades of poverty, war, chronic violence, and political instability. The strategy relied on allocating billions for economic programs and stimulating private-sector investment in the region in hopes that these programs would ultimately lead fewer migrants to make the dangerous journey north."

https://time.com/7001817/kamala-harris-immigration/

Since you didn’t read for comprehension, I’ll repeat myself:

The truth is irrelevant: nearly all of the American public and a fair chunk of the rest of the world heard “border czar” when her role was announced.

NP. I only heard that term used by conservatives so I ignored it just like I do the other nicknames they use for people. The truth should be the only source for relevancy. She was never labeled the border czar by anyone who mattered.

I agree with you, except that “anyone who mattered” includes voters. This squabble over what her role was there is going to lose an election. If she wants to win, she has to change the conversation about the border significantly. If she was put in charge of root causes, then have her talk about those, and have her connect the real US challenges with low-skilled immigration to her platform.

Insisting that you know the truth better, and that voters heard wrong and are stupid, is why Democrats lose elections. It’s why HRC lost.

But we’re here to talk about Biden, I thought?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is he still alive?

Yes.

p.s. I love that he still won’t do an interview with the Times.

What does that mean? Do you mean the New York Times? I thought Trump had vendettas against journalists, not the President, so your statement is very confusing.

The New York Times’s coverage of this election has been really strangely pro-Trump and the Biden campaign was ticked off about it. It turns out that the Times is pissed that he hasn’t given them an interview. It’s a whole thing.

I didn't know that he is holding back but I am glad. I am furious at the NYT for how they have treated Biden. I have been a loyal reader my entire life and am arguing with my husband about not renewing.