Yet, right up to the end - in the MSM and on this very board - we had people saying Biden just had a stutter. Ignore all Biden's applied dementia that your eyes could see and your ears could hear. The man was just tongue-tied. That’s all.
The Decline of the DNC III
- Thread starter crimsonaudio
- Start date
If you can recall, his State of the Union speech was well received. But his lack of public speaking was an issue and his lack of campaigning was becoming an issue as well. He's no different than Reagan in his decline started near the end of his first Presidency, but it's the President's staff which are both disseminators of their policies and also their protectors. They did their jobs well honestly and unfortunately for both Presidents.Yet, right up to the end - in the MSM and on this very board - we had people saying Biden just had a stutter. Ignore all Biden's applied dementia that your eyes could see and your ears could hear. The man was just tongue-tied. That’s all.
Tracking Discourse Complexity Preceding Alzheimer’s Disease Diagnosis: A Case Study Comparing the Press Conferences of Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush - PMC
Changes in some lexical features of language have been associated with the onset and progression of Alzheimer’s disease. Here we describe a method to extract key features from discourse transcripts, which we evaluated on non-scripted news ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Now it's time for the overprotective staff trend to stop and the current President to resign before he gets far worse than Biden and Reagan.
I recall Biden being in obvious decline for quite a while. I was not a stutter; it was an old man regularly misfiring mentally. Yet pointing out the obvious was snarkily dismissed by the bootlicks in the MSM and the tribalists here. The willful blindness was blatant and hilarious. It wasn’t until Biden figuratively (and perhaps also literally) crapped all over himself in the debate that everyone had to admit that the emperor had no clothes. But now a lot of these same people are trying to say they were never DNC fanboys, or they try to obscure the issue with whataboutism.If you can recall, his State of the Union speech was well received. But his lack of public speaking was an issue and his lack of campaigning was becoming an issue as well. He's no different than Reagan in his decline started near the end of his first Presidency, but it's the President's staff which are both disseminators of their policies and also their protectors. They did their jobs well honestly and unfortunately for both Presidents.
Tracking Discourse Complexity Preceding Alzheimer’s Disease Diagnosis: A Case Study Comparing the Press Conferences of Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush - PMC
Changes in some lexical features of language have been associated with the onset and progression of Alzheimer’s disease. Here we describe a method to extract key features from discourse transcripts, which we evaluated on non-scripted news ...
Now it's time for the overprotective staff trend to stop and the current President to resign before he gets far worse than Biden and Reagan.
I've said this before, but it probably bears repeating.
Joe Biden has a lot of the issues you would expect an 82 year-old to have--that's why I was never in favor of him running for a second term (I wasn't overly thrilled with him running in 2020, but understood that he was the best option under the circumstances). I suspect that he had initially planned on serving one term, right up until Jan 6. That day, and its immediate aftermath, made several things clear to all:
In the absence of a path to new blood, Biden and/or his team decided that hey, Biden beat Trump once, let's do it again. And because the DNC did not have an another option to push, Biden was able to establish enough momentum to con anyone thinking of challenging him.Strategically, having Biden resign and Harris installed would have been a good move--she'd then be running as the incumbent. But no one in the DNC was particularly thrilled about that option--with reason.
DNC failed to nip that one in the bud, just like they let far too many MoCs to remain in office far too long--in large part because much of the DNC leadership was in that group. And that one let the GOP pass their big beautiful POS without requiring a unanimous vote--yet another own-goal for the DNC..
What would have happened had Biden not faceplanted in the debate? Who knows. In the absence of the circus surrounding the candidate swap, Biden might have kept his momentum and won. Which on the one hand, Trump out of office, yay, but we've still got an 81-year-old as the president.
The above illustrates, more than anything, just how desperate the DNC is for new leadership--not so much leaders in Congress--though they need those too--but mainly the behind the scenes leadership that develops long-term strategy. The GOP has had that for decades; the DNC hasn't had it for decades.
So if you're worried about the potential for more left-wing voices becoming more powerful, you'd best start finding some viable alternatives. People who can coordinate attacks on Trump while also working at the state and local level. People who can do more than write a "strongly-worded letter" (SMDH). Personally, I think Katie Porter would be great for a behind the scenes position.
(Damn, this ended up being a lot longer than I had intended...)
Joe Biden has a lot of the issues you would expect an 82 year-old to have--that's why I was never in favor of him running for a second term (I wasn't overly thrilled with him running in 2020, but understood that he was the best option under the circumstances). I suspect that he had initially planned on serving one term, right up until Jan 6. That day, and its immediate aftermath, made several things clear to all:
- Trump had organized an insurrection.
- There were no signs of him losing control over the GOP base.
- The GOP leadership had no intention of doing anything about it--despite multiple opportunities.
In the absence of a path to new blood, Biden and/or his team decided that hey, Biden beat Trump once, let's do it again. And because the DNC did not have an another option to push, Biden was able to establish enough momentum to con anyone thinking of challenging him.Strategically, having Biden resign and Harris installed would have been a good move--she'd then be running as the incumbent. But no one in the DNC was particularly thrilled about that option--with reason.
DNC failed to nip that one in the bud, just like they let far too many MoCs to remain in office far too long--in large part because much of the DNC leadership was in that group. And that one let the GOP pass their big beautiful POS without requiring a unanimous vote--yet another own-goal for the DNC..
What would have happened had Biden not faceplanted in the debate? Who knows. In the absence of the circus surrounding the candidate swap, Biden might have kept his momentum and won. Which on the one hand, Trump out of office, yay, but we've still got an 81-year-old as the president.
The above illustrates, more than anything, just how desperate the DNC is for new leadership--not so much leaders in Congress--though they need those too--but mainly the behind the scenes leadership that develops long-term strategy. The GOP has had that for decades; the DNC hasn't had it for decades.
So if you're worried about the potential for more left-wing voices becoming more powerful, you'd best start finding some viable alternatives. People who can coordinate attacks on Trump while also working at the state and local level. People who can do more than write a "strongly-worded letter" (SMDH). Personally, I think Katie Porter would be great for a behind the scenes position.
(Damn, this ended up being a lot longer than I had intended...)
Last edited:
Hell, wasn't Woodrow Wilson basically a near vegetable after his 1919 stroke.
I saw a few bits from Biden's appearance on that show I refuse to name that rhymes with "spew".
Maybe they shot him full of vitamins and meth, but he seemed really lucid.
I'm starting to think he may have some dementia, but I also think he was probably just tired. Didn't he cut away from debate practice and take a 2 hr nap by the pool?
I'm 65, and I can attest.
Excuse, me. I'M A MAN!! I'M 65!!!
I saw a few bits from Biden's appearance on that show I refuse to name that rhymes with "spew".
Maybe they shot him full of vitamins and meth, but he seemed really lucid.
I'm starting to think he may have some dementia, but I also think he was probably just tired. Didn't he cut away from debate practice and take a 2 hr nap by the pool?
I'm 65, and I can attest.
Excuse, me. I'M A MAN!! I'M 65!!!
Reagan looked absolutely nothing at all like Joe Biden nor did he have anywhere near the issues.
Do you really think Biden could have given the "tear down this wall" equivalent in June 2027? I surmise his selective amnesia on Iran-contra was more a case of not wanting to commit perjury than it was actual memory loss. Can you imagine Biden even having the intellectual capacity to MEET with Putin (or any world leader) and be a talkative leader in November 2025 or October 2026 to coincide with Reagan's discussions in Geneva and Iceland?
The political version of the Hatfields and McCoys - "they got one of ours, so one of theirs has to go now."
Yes.
But Woodrow Wilson also didn't live in a world with nuclear weapons, either.
I agree with this for the most part. It's far more accurate than anything I've seen come out of either party in the last several years.
One problem with the DNC and even the party to a point is that it is now largely a New England to Richmond/Chicago/West Coast party and nothing more. But I would add that politicians learn all the wrong lessons and think they rise to the level of "inviolable precedents." And yet if one rocks the boat, he's the bigger problem.
It has been an article of faith ever since 1980 that you DO NOT run a primary campaign against an incumbent President of your own party.
Reagan was tagged as divisive in 1976 on the Republican side, but he could legit argue that Ford had never been elected at all by anyone nationally. When Ted Kennedy decided to destroy Jimmy Carter, everyone realized why this would never work: destroy the incumbent, unite the party YOU fractured at a Convention, and then run on the record you'd basically trashed for the previous month(s). And that's why it has almost always been true that when an incumbent PRESIDENT goes for reelection, his party members fall in line and refuse to increase the vulnerability.
I say that to say this: I again am not sure exactly how the Democrats replace Biden without doing as much or more damage than they did.
It was extreme chutzpah to think they were going to get away with, "Well, he can't run for reelection because he's baked, but he can stay in office!" If he had had a more coherent opponent than Trump - one who could narrow that argument down to a two clause thrust with mockery - it would have hurt them even more.
Biden would be a lame duck the day he said, "I'm not running again."
But if he waits, fundraising and primary campaigns are impossible.
And if you remove him by the 25th Amendment, you kinda validate every criticism the GOP says.
And btw everyone, let's not sugarcoat it with Biden - he did not "put his country first to save them from Trump," he was FORCED OUT by rich donors who said, "You're not getting another dime from us until he's no longer the ticket lead."
I think the empty "what if" question is whether this scenario happens if, say, Nikki Haley is the nominee. I know we're told, "No, this was a Trump thing," but I'm being told that by the same people who participated in a long running lie, too.
So people apparently didn't vote for Biden because we didnt know the someone who would not be elected running the country in his stead. Whereas, we voted for Trump who should not have under any circumstances been elected and yet we still don't know who is actually running the country...
Did I get this right?
Did I get this right?
No.
I think everyone is gaslighting right now.
Anyone who has worked in the White House will tell you it is IMPOSSIBLE for ANY President to manage all of what goes through there - and much of it is done by the staff. The only reason we know so little about any STAFF with Trump is because his fragile ego won't tolerate it. What's funny is that SMART Presidents realize that you let the staff say things without micromanaging them so long as it is in basic agreement with the President's agenda - but also so you can blame them (and fire them) if a political hot potato (with an "e" if you're Dan Quayle) lands on the leader's lap.
This whole "Biden wasn't running the country" was in all honesty probably not nearly as true as it's being made to sound. But by the same token, he's the one who bears the brunt of it as the office holder AND the issue of how they were going to pull this off in a second term, too.
My suspicion is more along the lines that Biden has severe limitations imposed by his age in a television and nuclear era that are unacceptable to more than half of the voters. I don't buy the dementia patient stuff but that doesn't change the fact he looked like many of our grandparents whom we see as in need of special attention and care even at their best. That's not a good look for a President.
Maybe we should be concentrating on the shortcomings of the current president rather than those of the last? All this is a distraction. I think all(?) would agree that Biden should have never run for a 2nd term.
Last edited:
You're not even close to being wrong here, but the media has a long history in this country of settling scores with people they feel have misled them. And in this case, it involves them getting caught in the cover-up.
This reminds me of when we beat LSU to avenge the 2011 regular season, and I had the misfortune of being off that morning to watch the ESPN shows (First Take, The Herd, etc) and they spent about 80% of their non-commercial time talking about TIM TEBOW!!
For those who have forgotten, that was the year when Tebow hit that overtime TD to stun Pittsburgh in the wildcard playoffs on Sunday. Alabama crushed LSU on Monday. And on Tuesday, ESPN was STILL "all Tebow, all the time." And then they'd say, "Yeah, our ratings go up when we talk about Tim Tebow." But it's poppycock in most cases. This isn't Caitlin Clark elevating a corner of the basement sport to the center of the basement, it was "we have a bunch of black hosts who will whine about Tebow and a complete tool (Skip Clueless) who will make Tebow sound like he's the Second Son of God." THAT is what made their ratings go up, the intentional concocted controversy of a pro wrestling storyline.
Now, the media is caught red-handed as the crooked referee in this particular match. They now have to save face and act like a concerted effort fooled them, that they weren't in on the ground floor.
Here's a better idea: fire your million dollar reporters, get a new head of the news division, admit that your recent journalism hasn't been up to standards and that you'll do what you can in the future.
Um, tap tap tap....<**microphone feedback**>
Biden isn't President anymore. He hasn't been for a good 4 months.
I know I am biased, but the country was in far better shape - even IF he was a little impaired. There were competent people on watch. Unlike the blithering idiots spreading measles, screwing air travel security, and not even knowing what habeaus corpus means. And I dare anyone to try to argue that Republicans wouldn't have lost their damn minds if Obama or Biden had held a crypto scam summit like occurred last week in Mar a Lago.
(I can go on for a few more paragraphs.
)
Correct.
But some of the co-conspirators are talking about it on the shows because....oh yeah, they're now WRITING BOOKS AND MAKING MONEY for telling us what they insisted we weren't seeing for free. Most of this wall-to-wall coverage of Biden isn't being done by Trump or Fox News, it's being done by the likes of Morning Joe and everyone interviewing Jake Tapper.
I'm old enough to remember when people like Jake Tapper complained about how revolting it was that guys like John Bolton wouldn't testify before Congress about Trump, but they'd sell books.
You know, pretty much like Tapper is doing now.
========================
As far as better or worse, we have a guy who wakes up every morning wanting to read his name in the headline being enabled by a party that lost its own moral compass long ago.
You're talking about an "admin" that went almost one year without convening a cabinet meeting and once it did, the meeting was basically led by Jill Biden? An admin that had it's SoD and the next in charge both out of the office and one who didn't let a damn soul know? Air travel security? Obviously that's been something that's been highly neglected by numerous administrations over the course of decades. (I can go on for a few more paragraphs)Um, tap tap tap....<**microphone feedback**>
Biden isn't President anymore. He hasn't been for a good 4 months.
I know I am biased, but the country was in far better shape - even IF he was a little impaired. There were competent people on watch. Unlike the blithering idiots spreading measles, screwing air travel security, and not even knowing what habeaus corpus means. And I dare anyone to try to argue that Republicans wouldn't have lost their damn minds if Obama or Biden had held a crypto scam summit like occurred last week in Mar a Lago.
(I can go on for a few more paragraphs.
Yep. It seems like it's far easier to sell ad time by stoking stupid nontroversies rather than focus on the damage being done by the current crop of absolute idiots.
California just legalized ILLEGALS OVERSEEING THEIR ELECTION
CA State Rep Carl DeMaio “Democrats just passed AB 930 to allow illegal immigrants to COUNT BALLOTS in our elections — This bill allows illegal immigrants to SERVE ON RECOUNT BOARDS and allow ballots to arrive 7 days after Election Day”
“And will require counting of ballots received SEVEN days after the election”
“I think most Californians would wonder how it can be a modern election if non citizens are serving on an election board overseeing the election — That's not an insult, that's common sense”
“Most 3rd world countries have something called an election day, not an election month. We're actually on track to having an election quarter here in California because our elections actually start 30 days prior to election day through mail in ballots. So a month out people can vote and then of course they are able to count ballots for 30 days after an election. That's a 60 day period. What this bill does is it would allow ballots to be returned up to 7 days after election day.”
CA State Rep Carl DeMaio “Democrats just passed AB 930 to allow illegal immigrants to COUNT BALLOTS in our elections — This bill allows illegal immigrants to SERVE ON RECOUNT BOARDS and allow ballots to arrive 7 days after Election Day”
“And will require counting of ballots received SEVEN days after the election”
“I think most Californians would wonder how it can be a modern election if non citizens are serving on an election board overseeing the election — That's not an insult, that's common sense”
“Most 3rd world countries have something called an election day, not an election month. We're actually on track to having an election quarter here in California because our elections actually start 30 days prior to election day through mail in ballots. So a month out people can vote and then of course they are able to count ballots for 30 days after an election. That's a 60 day period. What this bill does is it would allow ballots to be returned up to 7 days after election day.”
You'd think an Assemblyman from California would know that this has always been the case with absentee ballots just so long as they are POSTMARKED by Election Day. Hell, I remember when Republicans made a federal case out of this in Florida in 2000
Since this is the loyal opposition speaking, I automatically assume it's a pile of hooey. However - isn't this guy seeing the bigger picture?
If California has illegals overseeing this, ICE can just show up on Election Day and deport them without due process, which sounds win/win for the Trumpies in my view.
Methinks he hath - at the most - a tiny scintilla of truth to what he saith.
It's difficult to say the press isn't covering Trump's tariffs or DOGE or anything, though. They've turned weekly stock market crashes that recover in two days into front page news.
It's probably because every time he passes gas, the stock market reacts. It's the nature of the markets. Skittish. Which is why we need a stable person in charge, or at least making decisions. We don't have that anymore in any of the cabinet positions, department heads, etc. One big cluster of copulation.
Latest threads
-
Link: Interesting result re: TideFans ... from Perplexity.ai- Started by BamaNation
- Replies: 3
-
81 years ago today, D-Day - never forget- Started by crimsonaudio
- Replies: 0
-
-
BREAKING And Now Trump is going after the Biden White House
- Started by jthomas666
- Replies: 3
-
The Executive Overreach Thread
- Started by CrimsonJazz
- Replies: 19
-
China Smuggles Agroterrorism Fungus into the US- Started by Tidewater
- Replies: 6