ADVERTISEMENT

Joe Biden should jump in now

thewop

HB Legend
Jun 27, 2002
21,090
21,673
113
I'm convinced Bernie and Trump would be bad for America. They've both successfully pointed out that American's are frustrated with the status quo, but Bernie wants to do away with everything that got America to the top, while Trump will have us in a war or 3 within 60 days of taking office. Meanwhile, Ted Cruz wasn't born in America, which probably should disqualify him, but at the very least puts him at a big disadvantage, so then we have...Hillary...who no sane person trusts, but a hardcore Dem will still vote for because "at least she's not a republican."

So why couldn't Biden jump in now? No votes have taken place yet, and we're Americans...we change our mind all the time. I bet he could overtake Bernie in a week, and Hillary within 3.

Let's face it, our options among front-runners aren't very good right now. Fortunately we've still got a few months for someone to emerge, how about that Libertarian New Mexico governor (Johnson)? Can we put him in both parties debates? I say let's do it.
 
I don't think America is looking for someone more moderate. The more moderate Republicans are doing poorly in the polls and while Clinton (the most moderate of the three Democrats) is still leading the Democratic field, she isn't leading by as much as she should be with her massive advantages. A lot of Trump and Sanders supporters aren't people who are normally primary voters.
 
12540660_10156516892200201_4676516504102231036_n.jpg
 
I'm convinced Bernie and Trump would be bad for America. They've both successfully pointed out that American's are frustrated with the status quo, but Bernie wants to do away with everything that got America to the top, while Trump will have us in a war or 3 within 60 days of taking office. Meanwhile, Ted Cruz wasn't born in America, which probably should disqualify him, but at the very least puts him at a big disadvantage, so then we have...Hillary...who no sane person trusts, but a hardcore Dem will still vote for because "at least she's not a republican."

So why couldn't Biden jump in now? No votes have taken place yet, and we're Americans...we change our mind all the time. I bet he could overtake Bernie in a week, and Hillary within 3.

Let's face it, our options among front-runners aren't very good right now. Fortunately we've still got a few months for someone to emerge, how about that Libertarian New Mexico governor (Johnson)? Can we put him in both parties debates? I say let's do it.
How exactly did horrendous wealth gaps get America to the top?
 
Bernie just wants to restore the Second Bill Of Rights, and maybe add on it a bit. What made America great? Income inequality, crumbling infastructer, our of control medical costs and massive private debt?

Pretty sure Biden just takes voters from Hillary. He could guarantee a Bernie win.
 
How exactly did horrendous wealth gaps get America to the top?
People who aren't wealthy (most of us) have every right to have a great idea, follow it, and go get wealthy themselves. They also have every right to make excuses not to. We worry FAR to much about what someone else has while making excuses for ourselves and others. Rules put in place to raise the floor and lower the ceiling don't improve our country. It doesn't mean we shouldn't help people in need, but we shouldn't harm the potential of the doers either.

Moral_victory may be right though, Biden may simply guarantee a Bernie nomination.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SWIowahawks
Some sort of Green Party art work I guess.

I noticed Hillary looking awfully dumpy the other day. Extra layers of thermal clothing or overeating on the campaign trail?
Her gays are failing her, pay back I like to think. But that green party art is so odd to my mind. It looks like art for a natural gas company or a fundamentalist rapture Christian group. Let it burn!
 
I like Joe more than I like Hillary but less than I like Bernie.

As soon as Biden gets in, we get reminded of the reasons why he isn't a good candidate.

Hard to know if Joe would hurt Bernie or Hillary more.

Those Dems who are leaning Bernie because they don't like Hillary probably jump to Joe. Those who like Bernie's positions on issues probably don't - UNLESS Biden adopts a lot of Bernie's positions. Which he might do.

OTOH, those Hillary folks who are holding their noses while supporting Hillary may also jump to Joe.
 
That's a part of it. The tax code is part of it. Privatization of public resources is part of it. Extreme patent and other property protections are part of it.
The tax code evolved from the Federal Reserve Act and the 16th Amendment (same time) which suddenly allowed Congress to tax our personal income.
 
People who aren't wealthy (most of us) have every right to have a great idea, follow it, and go get wealthy themselves. They also have every right to make excuses not to. We worry FAR to much about what someone else has while making excuses for ourselves and others. Rules put in place to raise the floor and lower the ceiling don't improve our country. It doesn't mean we shouldn't help people in need, but we shouldn't harm the potential of the doers either.

But you have to see how income inequality plays a role here. The rich are always going to be able to drive out the little guy through sheer size. Look at what happened to all the Mom and Pop's when Walmart came to town.
 
Trump is a punch in the nose to a system that has failed. That's all he is. But I want to send that punch as hard as I can.

Harkin, Grassley......... they are all guilty and we as Americans deserve what we've got.
 
  • Like
Reactions: INXS83 and IaHawk44
I'm convinced Bernie and Trump would be bad for America. They've both successfully pointed out that American's are frustrated with the status quo, but Bernie wants to do away with everything that got America to the top, while Trump will have us in a war or 3 within 60 days of taking office. Meanwhile, Ted Cruz wasn't born in America, which probably should disqualify him, but at the very least puts him at a big disadvantage, so then we have...Hillary...who no sane person trusts, but a hardcore Dem will still vote for because "at least she's not a republican."

So why couldn't Biden jump in now? No votes have taken place yet, and we're Americans...we change our mind all the time. I bet he could overtake Bernie in a week, and Hillary within 3.

Let's face it, our options among front-runners aren't very good right now. Fortunately we've still got a few months for someone to emerge, how about that Libertarian New Mexico governor (Johnson)? Can we put him in both parties debates? I say let's do it.

America is far from being at the top and all Trump would do is take us further away from the top with his laissez-faire
style of American exceptionalism. To make America great again means to let the middle class rise again and to lower the poverty level. Money has to come out of politics and term levels need to be in place. Our representatives in Washington become very wealthy individuals and that has to stop. The Stock Act was a great starting point - until the Republican Congress repealed the disclosure part of the act, and now they're again able to make stock market trades based on insider information. The only candidate who can come close to truly making America great again is Bernie Sanders. Sanders is not a true socialist by its definition, he's a Democratic socialist and there's a huge difference between the two. Liberals do not want a true socialist society, and anyone who believes they do is insane. I certainly don't want that and I can guarantee you that other liberals on this forum don't want it either. I wonder how many conservatives on here have actually researched and studied Sanders, I would bet very few have. If one doesn't understand what a candidate believes they have no right to judge him. Americans need to do their own research, disregard all media in order to form an educated opinion of all the candidates. Not doing so is detrimental to our country, but it's also detrimental to ourselves.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Welfare_+_Poverty.htm
 
But you have to see how income inequality plays a role here. The rich are always going to be able to drive out the little guy through sheer size. Look at what happened to all the Mom and Pop's when Walmart came to town.
You're right, and with a new Wal-Mart Supercenter opening in our town this summer, I'll see that impact first hand where I live. There's going to be about 200 low-paying jobs created, which will replace 3-4 business owners, and 40-50 low-paying jobs. This is what I anticipate: The biggest losers here will be the owners of the small businesses (and places like Dollar General, and Family Dollar), but it's also going to bring additional traffic from people in surrounding communities who currently have no reason to shop here, and a net gain of jobs to our town. Some small businesses will actually benefit from the additional traffic Wal-mart will bring, which serve niche's that wal-mart can't fully fill (a furniture store, jewelry store, and hardware store).

I view income inequality as a product of the freedom we have, but not necessarily a negative. In the case of a 3rd world country where a few families control all the laws, money, opportunities, etc. and people truly have no opportunity to make their lives better, then sure, that's a problem. That's not here. Even though money can influence our politicians, I can't honestly sit here and say that's the reason I'm not wealthy today.
 
I like Joe more than I like Hillary but less than I like Bernie.

As soon as Biden gets in, we get reminded of the reasons why he isn't a good candidate.

Hard to know if Joe would hurt Bernie or Hillary more.

Those Dems who are leaning Bernie because they don't like Hillary probably jump to Joe. Those who like Bernie's positions on issues probably don't - UNLESS Biden adopts a lot of Bernie's positions. Which he might do.

OTOH, those Hillary folks who are holding their noses while supporting Hillary may also jump to Joe.

I think a lot of people don't like Hillary. And a lot of people that do like Bernie are also smart enough to know that he won't win a general election (similar to how Republicans keep pushing out candidates way too polarizing to win the general election). I think Joe would be the next President if he runs.
 
You're right, and with a new Wal-Mart Supercenter opening in our town this summer, I'll see that impact first hand where I live. There's going to be about 200 low-paying jobs created, which will replace 3-4 business owners, and 40-50 low-paying jobs. This is what I anticipate: The biggest losers here will be the owners of the small businesses (and places like Dollar General, and Family Dollar), but it's also going to bring additional traffic from people in surrounding communities who currently have no reason to shop here, and a net gain of jobs to our town. Some small businesses will actually benefit from the additional traffic Wal-mart will bring, which serve niche's that wal-mart can't fully fill (a furniture store, jewelry store, and hardware store).

I view income inequality as a product of the freedom we have, but not necessarily a negative. In the case of a 3rd world country where a few families control all the laws, money, opportunities, etc. and people truly have no opportunity to make their lives better, then sure, that's a problem. That's not here. Even though money can influence our politicians, I can't honestly sit here and say that's the reason I'm not wealthy today.

So let's take another industry. How many cell phone carriers are there now? How many cable companies are there now? How many newspapers are truly independent? How many name changes has your bank gone through lately?

Size overwhelms the competition time and time again and we're forced to deal with an inferior product jammed down our throats by rich people consolidating their power. I would say America is becoming more like a third world country every day, and it sure isn't because of immigrants.
 
So let's take another industry. How many cell phone carriers are there now? How many cable companies are there now? How many newspapers are truly independent? How many name changes has your bank gone through lately?

Size overwhelms the competition time and time again and we're forced to deal with an inferior product jammed down our throats by rich people consolidating their power. I would say America is becoming more like a third world country every day, and it sure isn't because of immigrants.
Conservatives don't really want a free market or competition. Except for labor and commodities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2facedboonefan
So let's take another industry. How many cell phone carriers are there now? How many cable companies are there now? How many newspapers are truly independent? How many name changes has your bank gone through lately?

Size overwhelms the competition time and time again and we're forced to deal with an inferior product jammed down our throats by rich people consolidating their power. I would say America is becoming more like a third world country every day, and it sure isn't because of immigrants.
Yet there's nothing stopping "Net10" wireless from stealing market share from Verizon, and each time the bank changes names, the same people work there. Nothing stopped Facebook from displacing myspace, or android from stealing share from apple. Big companies were small once, and had to be profitable in order to grow. Had their profits been taken away and given to government to handle, they'd have found it difficult to knock off the leaders. If you obliterate all big business, then the inferior products we "have jammed down our throat" but are better than nothing may cease to exist, or a better product that costs more would be available to fewer people in fewer parts of the country. It's just not all bad.

I've worked for a large public company, and may never again because it kind of sucked the life out of me, but the benefits were very good and the pay was as well. They produced a very good product, but it couldn't be all things to all people. Cutting their legs out from under them would hurt its employees and the surrounding community, and that's not a good thing.
 
Yet there's nothing stopping "Net10" wireless from stealing market share from Verizon, and each time the bank changes names, the same people work there. Nothing stopped Facebook from displacing myspace, or android from stealing share from apple. Big companies were small once, and had to be profitable in order to grow. Had their profits been taken away and given to government to handle, they'd have found it difficult to knock off the leaders. If you obliterate all big business, then the inferior products we "have jammed down our throat" but are better than nothing may cease to exist, or a better product that costs more would be available to fewer people in fewer parts of the country. It's just not all bad.

I've worked for a large public company, and may never again because it kind of sucked the life out of me, but the benefits were very good and the pay was as well. They produced a very good product, but it couldn't be all things to all people. Cutting their legs out from under them would hurt its employees and the surrounding community, and that's not a good thing.

I will agree that there is a balance, but the companies you're talking about were already huge or were lucky enough to get in on something at the very beginning that ended up being really big. Even Net 10 is owned by the largest cell phone carrier in Latin America (they're in just about every country), and they pay Verizon and the other three for the right to use their networks.

The same people may work at the bank after it changes ownership, but do they do things the same way? I just think we've let this get out of control. Companies like Walmart can pay their workers low wages, only have two cashiers for thirty customers, and still win because they can afford to charge less.
 
By allowing the federal reserve to take the monetary system out of the control of the electorate.
You don't seriously believe this, do you? The Fed is to blame for the wealth gap? And all this time I though it was less worker rights and a tax system that believes that trickle down will benefit anybody but Uncle Scrooge.
 
You don't seriously believe this, do you? The Fed is to blame for the wealth gap? And all this time I though it was less worker rights and a tax system that believes that trickle down will benefit anybody but Uncle Scrooge.
You've clearly, repeatedly, displayed your lack of understanding of what the FED is, it's origin, it's power, it's functions, it's lack of transparency, and basically anything about the institution entirely. So... I don't expect that you've suddenly become enlightened now.
 
Biden cannot jump in now. In two months if Hillary has stumbled through South Carolina and Nevada he should come in off the top rope with Elizabeth Warren as his running mate.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT