The Most Active Threads Since Friday

The list of most active threads over the weekend was heavily dominated by political topics and all of today's topics are from the "Political Discussion" forum. The most active thread of all was the presidential debate thread that I've already discussed. The most active thread after that was titled, "As a Democrat, it all feels hopeless.", and posted, of course, in the "Political Discussion" forum. The original poster says that in light of President Joe Biden's poor debate performance it appears that Republicans will "sweep to victory". But, even if that doesn't happen, the Supreme Court has already severely limited the possibilities of implementing liberal policies. Meaningful gun control is not going to happen, efforts to protect the environment are being set back and will be even more difficult after the reverse of the Chevron ruling. In addition, the boundaries between church and state are being erased. The original poster asks what there is to be happy about. This thread is 43 pages long and, as such, I am unable to read much of it. What I did notice is that almost immediately those responding engaged in two behaviors that I have seen dominating more and more threads in the political forum lately. The first is related to the expression, "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." There are a number of posters who seem to respond with their own pet diagnosis, regardless of the specific topic. Early in this thread, for example, posters fixated on age and seemed to blame much of what is happening today on those who are over 60 and suggested things would not improve until those folks were no longer with us. This response is much like the knee-jerk reaction to blame everything bad on "boomers" that we see across DCUM. A second behavior, related in many ways, is to not only bring up a pet issue, but an off-topic pet issue. An example of this was a complaint about the Democratic National Committee not allowing more primary choices. But, with regard to off-topic posts, that was just the beginning. The thread is basically a collection of general gripes and talking points that posters want to share which mostly have no connection to the thread's topic at all. I agree with the original poster that now is a very dismal time to be a liberal Democrat. But to undertand how we got here, I think we need to take a wider view of things than posters in this thread seem to be doing. For instance, I have my own pet issue. One of the most significant changes over the last 20 years or so has been the vastly increased wealth disparity. An ever-increasing amount of the world's wealth is being accumulated into the hands of an increasingly small number of people. This disparity interferes with the proper working of all other systems on which our political and economic systems are based. That disparity has allowed billionaires such as Harlan Crow to essentially purchase multiple Supreme Court justices. It allowed Elon Musk to purchase what was not long ago the World's most influential social media network and turn it into a haven for Nazis. The attitude of billionaire class appears to be to exploit our world for every penny that can be squeezed out of it and then fly off to Mars. People over 60 and the DNC's influence on the primary are small potatoes relative to this. And, yes, the fact that those influencing events have little interest in anyone's well-being other than their own does not inspire much hope. 

The next most active thread was also posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. Titled, "Yeah, sorry, I don't care about the debate performance...", the original poster says that President Joe Biden looked old and tired during the debate but at no point did Biden's performance cause her to think that she would now vote for the "insane criminal and rapist who wants to ruin my country". The original poster doesn't have much appreciation for Biden as a candidate but would vote for a "bucket of rocks" if that were the only alternative to former President, current cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump. As is apparently normal now in the political forum, this thread went off topic pretty quickly, eventually turning into an argument about the January 6 insurrection. But with regard to the topic of the thread, what the original poster is demonstrating is the intense partisanship that currently characterizes U.S. politics. This partisanship is mostly understandable. From a Democratic perspective, many of the rights we have taken for granted are at risk. As was pointed out in the previous thread, issues such as gun control, environmental protection, and abortion rights will all be impacted by the outcome of this election. Therefore, it is not surprising that there are a significant number of posters who agree with the original poster. As far as they are concerned, Biden could have been completely catatonic during the debate and they would still support him. For their part, many MAGAs feel the same about Trump. In their case, it is less a case of fearing Biden — indeed they would likely support Trump even if his opponent were Jesus Christ himself — but rather their devotion to Trump. In the middle are a group, perhaps a large group, who are less partisan. They don't like either candidate, but they also don't have strong feelings against either one. The question is how the debate will impact this group. I can argue this question in two ways. One view is that this group is probably not well-informed politically and probably didn't watch the debate. I say this because anyone who has been paying attention to politics would have found that one side or the other better represents their views. The gulf between Democrats and Republicans is too wide not to. As such, these voters probably will hear about the debate either second or third hand in a very boiled down form. Mostly likely, therefore, they will hear that Biden appeared to be completely mentally incompetent, swaying them toward Trump. On the other hand, are those like Allan Lichtman, an American University professor who has correctly predicted the outcome of 9 out of 10 of the last presidential elections. While Lichtman has not yet predicted the outcome of this election, he says that debate performance is not important and a bad performance can easily be overcome. As a result, it could turn out that the only ones who believe the debate matters are MAGAs and pants-wetting Democrats (most of whom will still vote for Biden).

Next was a thread titled, "WHO? New Democratic Nominee Thread" and, like all the threads I'll discuss today, was posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. In light of the debate, there has been considerable discussion about replacing President Joe Biden as the Democratic Presidential nominee. The original poster of this thread asks which combination of presidential and vice presidential candidates would have the best chance of winning the election. I have been convinced over the past few days that if Biden is replaced, the only option is Vice President Kamala Harris. This has to do with money contributed to political action committees that legally could not be transferred to another candidate. As a result, in my mind, this discussion should be about whether Harris would be a better candidate than Biden and, if so, who would be the best candidate for vice president. But those responding in the thread had other ideas. One of the biggest hurdles to replacing Biden quickly became evident. No matter who was proposed, someone would immediately provide a reason for why that individual would not be a good candidate. Posters are looking for perfection in a candidate and there is no perfect candidate. They used to say that politics is the art of compromise. That is less true today where many want total victory or nothing, but in the case of a presidential candidate, it seems to be reality. Biden is obviously not a perfect candidate. However, polls have yet to show that any other Democrat would be a better candidate. Moreover, one of the single strongest advantages a candidate can have is incumbency and only Biden is an incumbent. Gavin Newsom, Gretchen Whitmer, or Andy Beshear, as sitting governors have a form of incumbency, but that is unlikely to be as big an advantage as having the presidential bully pulpit. If a change in candidate were to be made, it might be best for Biden to do as some have suggested and resign now, allowing Harris to serve as the President and run as an incumbent. When proposing candidates, it is important to keep the rules in mind. The 12th Amendment prohibits presidential and vice presidential candidates from the same state. One poster recommended U.S. Senator Bob Casey from Pennsylvania along with Josh Shapiro the Governor of Pennsylvania. Not only are both Pennsylvania residents, their current jobs would make changing residency difficult. So that is probably not a good combination. However, this entire discussion is probably moot because Biden shows no sign of stepping down and leaders of the Democratic Party are now rallying around him.

The final thread that I will discuss today was, of course, posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. Titled, "Question for someone who knows: is there anything voters can do to actually convince Biden to step aside?", the original poster has clearly jumped on the "replace Biden" bus and wants to know what normal individuals can do to encourage Biden to be replaced. She suggests a Change.org petition. Of course this thread almost immediately went off-topic with posters addressing other issues and largely ignoring the thread's topic. Most of those off-topic posts were about issues I've already discussed. So, rather than simply repeat things, I'll take this opportunity to give my own views about Debateageddon. Personally, I wouldn't bother listening to what I have to say on the topic. So, if you keep reading, that's on you. Nevertheless, I agree that Biden had a disappointing performance during the debate. But, I don't think it was as bad as some are now making it seem and I do not believe that it demonstrates his incapacity to perform the job of president. I have long been concerned about Biden's age and he certainly didn't do himself any favors during the debate, but I still think that he has the ability to do his job and do it quite well (Israel-Gaza policy excepted). I suspect that Biden was thrown off by his cold that impacted his speaking and he may have been overly-prepared and ended up confused. Moreover, as Mike Tyson once said, "Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth." Biden and his advisors clearly had a plan. Unfortunately, that plan did not include immediately getting punched in the mouth and, hence, when Biden did get — figuratively — punched in the mouth, he was lost. I have no idea why Biden was not prepared to get punched in the mouth because he was debatting perhaps the World's most famous mouth-puncher. Step one of Biden's preparation for the debate should have been practicing getting punched in the mouth and being able to respond. Later in the debate, Biden showed exactly that ability. But it was too little, too late. I don't think Biden's debate performance actually demonstrates that he is not competent to do his job, but others clearly have doubts. Biden will need to work quickly to remove those doubts. Myths about candidates can quickly become reality. Al Gore never said that he invented the Internet and Sarah Palin never said that she can see Russia from her porch. Nevertheless, it is difficult to convince most people otherwise. Biden will need to do unscripted public events that will allow him to demonstrate his mental competence. The campaign will need to continue to stress that Biden is more likely to address issues of importance to the American people than former President, current cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump. Otherwise, Biden will go down in history as a mentally-incapacitated old man who blew a debate and Trump will likely win the election.