Donald Trump & Joe Biden

[sandGroundZero]

Joe Biden & Donald Trump
A thread devoted to Donald Trump and his prospective successor, Joe Biden

[sandGroundZero]

Donald Trump orders some bank notes from the Federal Reserve for distribution in the course of his re-election campaign. There's a problem though; the bank printed denominations of $18

The Donald crafty as ever, thinks they might work anyway. Just to be on the safe side, he goes to Joe Biden and inquires

Hey, Joe, can you change an $18 bill for me?

…to which Joe replies

Sure thing, Don. How would you like it? Two $9s or three $6s?

[sandGroundZero]

Appropriate? Or what?

Party animals

1. Jackàss for the Biden party; and
2. elephant for the Trump party (— never forgets a slight!)

[sandGroundZero]

Obamagate: What is the crime?

[Toodles McGinty]

I'd call Biden the lesser of two evils. Not that I see him as evil in any way. I just think he's not the man for the gargantuan task of getting the USA back on track after the double whammy of the Trump administration and the inevitable depression after the pandemic.

He's the Clinton continuity candidate. After this disaster has played out, the US electorate might be ready to return to politics as usual. They might even have considered Bernie, but he's a step too far left at the moment. Particularly when Americans seem to have huge difficulty in differentiating between communism, socialism, democratic socialism and social democracy.

Having said that, there are quite a few people here who haven't got that figured out, either...

I'm still of the opinion that Trump will get a second term. Unless he becomes too unpopular for his own ego to function. If the American population still think he is fit to lead them after the last 4 years, they pretty much deserve all they get. Although I am hoping that the era of the populists is done. They've been woefully exposed by this pandemic and no amount of sloganeering will surely repair the damage. Still wouldn't bet against him though.

[sandGroundZero]

"…I just think [Biden]'s not the man …"
It does seem as though the US Presidential election is Trump's to lose.

…Americans seem to have huge difficulty in differentiating between communism, socialism, democratic socialism and social democracy.

…those distinctions are rather arbitrary. The US Democratic party's coalition has unravelled relentlessly since the Presidency of LBJ for a variety of reasons. So-called progressive politics is on the back foot for not having any coherent vision to present to the electorate.

In the USA and in the United Kingdom the political institutions are constructed in such a way that voters are actually alienated from their primary political interests. A vision of new institutions — institutions which engage and develop citizens' connections with their communities and which promote civic virtues — is urgently needed.

[Toodles McGinty]

…those distinctions are rather arbitrary.

I think they are quite distinct. I wouldn't say anyone who is right of centre is fascist.

[Hector]

I think they are quite distinct. I wouldn't say anyone who is right of centre is fascist.

I think SGZ has a point.


While fascism ought to be easy enough to define, its misuse over the years to just mean further right than you believe is acceptable has made it a confusing category for most.And whatever the difference once was between
communism and socialism has been muddied ever since Lenin dealt with political reality and penned The State and Revolution.

[sandGroundZero]

Biden & Trump

…he's not the man for the gargantuan task of getting the USA back on track after the double whammy of the Trump administration and the inevitable depression after the pandemic.

…suggest that the US was "on track" prior to 2016. But, what track was that?

As labels go:

…communism, socialism, democratic socialism and social democracy

are not indistinct; I remarked they are arbitrary. Perhaps you'll agree they're relative.

Trouble in America (& the UK), voters have not guarded and extended their rights of political participation. Documentary maker Astra Taylor's film What is Democracy? asks just that question. It's eye opening.

[Toodles McGinty]

Trouble in America (& the UK), voters have not guarded and extended their rights of political participation. Documentary maker Astra Taylor's film What is Democracy? asks just that question. It's eye opening.

I agree.

I'll give that film a go.

[Toodles McGinty]

[QUOTE=sandGroundZero;6728410]

Biden & Trump

…suggest that the US was "on track" prior to 2016. But, what track was that?
[quote]

A step away from populism, I suppose. There have always been personality politics, and I'm not saying that any politician is good and pure, with the best interests of the people at heart. Not by a long way. But the populists with their sloganeering and rabble rousing, which is basically what it is, turns people from a nation with differing opinions into tribes. Tribes that could happily see the other side dead as long as they win. It's happened there. It's happened here. Brazil. Poland. Philippines. Hungary. And sadly, regardless of whichever 'tribe' you belong to, the whole nation suffers. Trump is the poster boy for populism. An egotist who believes he's entitled to be where he is.

As labels go: are not indistinct; I remarked they are arbitrary. Perhaps you'll agree they're relative.

I agree they are relative as in they are all left of centre, but they vary hugely with how far left they go. I am a social democrat at heart, leaning toward democratic socialism. I'm not a socialist in the truest sense of the word. I do believe society needs private business, not everything owned by the state. I'm certainly not a communist, nor do I personally know any Labour party members, or in the USA Democratic party members, who come close to being communist. Hence I find it incredibly frustrating when someone such as Bernie Sanders is regarded as a 'red under the bed' by a large section of US society. Ignorance, I know. But that isn't the exclusive domain of Americans.

[silver fox]

[QUOTE=Toodles McGinty;6728461][QUOTE=sandGroundZero;6728410]

Biden & Trump

…suggest that the US was "on track" prior to 2016. But, what track was that?

A step away from populism, I suppose. There have always been personality politics, and I'm not saying that any politician is good and pure, with the best interests of the people at heart. Not by a long way. But the populists with their sloganeering and rabble rousing, which is basically what it is, turns people from a nation with differing opinions into tribes. Tribes that could happily see the other side dead as long as they win. It's happened there. It's happened here. Brazil. Poland. Philippines. Hungary. And sadly, regardless of whichever 'tribe' you belong to, the whole nation suffers. Trump is the poster boy for populism. An egotist who believes he's entitled to be where he is.



I agree they are relative as in they are all left of centre, but they vary hugely with how far left they go. I am a social democrat at heart, leaning toward democratic socialism. I'm not a socialist in the truest sense of the word. I do believe society needs private business, not everything owned by the state. I'm certainly not a communist, nor do I personally know any Labour party members, or in the USA Democratic party members, who come close to being communist. Hence I find it incredibly frustrating when someone such as Bernie Sanders is regarded as a 'red under the bed' by a large section of US society. Ignorance, I know. But that isn't the exclusive domain of Americans.

Very true, even here on this site both you and I have been labelled communist, when neither of us are remotely close to being so.

[Toodles McGinty]

Very true, even here on this site both you and I have been labelled communist, when neither of us are remotely close to being so.

Yep. Or 'Trot' seems to have been rolled out recently. I'd guess by folk who haven't a clue about Marxism, never mind Trotskyism.

[sandGroundZero]

Labels are useful shorthand; but they always need to be applied with caution. "communism, socialism, democratic socialism and social democracy" are easily understood by you and me. However your post #5 demonstrates that you do not expect them to be understood the same way everywhere. Nor should you!

Populism is a label, too — generally a pejorative. Language is not fixed and it is socially and politically unproductive to casually characterize large numbers of individuals in such terms. As silver fox points out in post #12 even here in this forum labels are used divisively. If you really wish to change politics for the better, you need to develop a wholly different mindset.
Astra Taylor's Democracy May Not Exist, but We'll Miss It When It's Gone along with Zephyr Teachout's Break 'Em Up (publication in July) and her other title Corruption in America together develop a theme of mine, namely: a new approach to democratic legitimacy is both necessary and possible. It requires recognizing that peoples' motives are not binary; there is a spectrum (very roughly) self-serving to altruistic. What is more, these attitudes are not fixed. We need political institutions which promote civic mindedness as opposed to self-seeking. I believe this is possible.

[Toodles McGinty]

We need political institutions which promote civic mindedness as opposed to self-seeking. I believe this is possible.

I'd like to think so. I have friends across the political spectrum, as far as it goes in this country, anyway. None extreme right or left. But pretty broad ranging political views. Remarkably, with this particular set, Jo Cox was spot on. Even though they'd hate to admit it. Might take different routes to end up in broadly the same area, but they do get there.

But to change the political institutions, there needs to be an appetite for it. As it stands, you have certain types. The fanatics, the 'my team cannot be wrong, cannot be criticised'. Then those willing to debate, to exchange ideas. In that respect, I'd have liked to see where 'The Independent Group' ended up. I know they were nothing but a protest party, ticked off at their traditional homes. But I would have liked to see if they could have worked together to the point of publishing a manifesto, and if it would be so different from a regular centrist party such as the Lib-Dems. Then the traditionalist type that are basically lead by whichever newspaper they take. And finally those who aren't really interested in politics at all. They are frustrating, as they can't see that virtually everything in life is affected by politics.

Of all of those, I can only see an appetite for change among the second group. Perhaps a little from the third. The vast majority are stuck in place with no desire or will to change. But an overhaul of our political system would certainly be interesting. And perhaps the only way to break up the tribal mentality that makes the HoC a howling, frothing-at-the-mouth bearpit, rather than a debating chamber.