Correction: most of the US voted for Ms. Clinton. She lost in the electoral college system. But your point about Biden v. Trump still holds.
> On Mar 6, 2024, at 4:17 PM, Ted Byfield via nettime-l > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 6 Mar 2024, at 13:11, Francis Nowak wrote: > >> "Beer brew here is used to [unintelligible] to make the brew beer >> [unintelligible] ooh earth rider thanks for the great Lakes" - Joe Biden, >> 2024. I mean, he's a pretty old guy, like a lot of the guys packing the >> upper reaches of the US political scene. You remember Mitch McConnell >> freezing mid-speech a while back? Or Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died at the >> wheel at age 87, leaving the Republicans with an absolute majority in the >> Supreme Court, to the terrible detriment of women across America. > > Of course. And as much as I respected RBG, it was clear (and I argued) for > years before her all too timely demise that she should step down to avoid > that all too predictable result. And I've said the same about every other > gerontocrat in the party and beyond, Biden included. But that's just one part > of a forward-looking, pragmatic assessment of how the Dems can and should > actively embrace shifting demographics and, with that, dramatically new > policies. Not, like the above, ChatGPT-esque "old old old" noise with a > cherrypicked quotation on top to make it seem lifelike. > >> Trump's also pretty old (77 to Biden's 82), but I think he's lived a more >> relaxed kind of life, and his general speaking style (remember Covfefe?) >> makes a virtue out of unintelligibility, digression, left-field >> interjection, as the relentless chaos-machine of Trump's subconscious >> steers him through. You remember all those quotes you used to read from >> Trump where he came across as unhinged? If you watch him speak, it's not so >> much that he's mad, as it's just all ad-libs, off-the-cuff, like a slime >> mold reaching out a tendril one way and the next, hoping he'll find >> something. > > I don't see anything useful in this. > >> For me, I don't get why anybody feels obligated to close ranks around >> Biden. Nixon had it right: the whole mechanism of politics in a two-state >> America is about who hates who. It is not a system where people vote for a >> good candidate - it's a system where people vote for keeping the worse >> candidate out. And that's why Biden is there in the first place: if the >> electoral system strongly biased towards charismatic, competent candidates, >> nobody could imagine Biden coming out on top. I mean, would he even be in >> the top fifty percent of US citizens? Would Mitch McConnel? Would Nancy >> Pelosi? > > I don't see anything useful in this either, but I do see "Nixon had it > right." 🧐 When you start with that premise, without also considering how the > right's subsequent embrace of his lawless cynicism shaped its growing > extremism, it's no surprise you'd see what came as inevitable. But it wasn't > and it needn't be. > >> Practically, you have to hold your nose and vote for the guy, but do you >> have to pretend you're voting *for* him? Half of the USA would vote for a >> dog with mange if it was on the ballot, and it meant Trump wouldn't get in. >> Half of the USA voted for *Trump*, so Clinton didn't get in. > > So concerted efforts to, let's see here... turn the aircraft carrier of > student debt... ramp up antitrust enforcement... "onshore" major industries > like microchip manufacture... roll back the rise of "junk fees"... rein in > the excesses of crypto... not give the fossil-fuel everything it wants... > none of that matters because mumble mumble hold your nose mumble mumble > Hillary Clinton mumble mumble mangy dog? the Biden admin has done 👉🏼 far 👈🏼 > more to redress generational injustices than any president in my lifetime, > and that matters because *all* issues are generational now. > > But (1) nettime isn't really the place to debate domestic US issues, and (2) > even if it were I'm not sure how to debate an argument like BUT GRANDPA'S GOT > MORE WRINKLES THAN DAD. I don't see much worth debating here. I try to be > more generous and less acerbic than this, but your reply sounded more than > anything else like a Daily Mail opinion piece. You're hardly alone in that > respect. > > Ted > -- > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: https://www.nettime.org > # contact: [email protected] -- # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: https://www.nettime.org # contact: [email protected]
