Let go Brandon?

[Funcrusher]

So our friends at The Guardian have published an article today, credited to Guardian Staff, which delivers the shocking news that Joe Biden is fucking senile

Biden mistakes living European leader for dead one – for second time in a week

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/08/joe-biden-kohl-mitterrand-gaffe-age-questions

This is a bit surprising as surely The Graun realises that Biden is likely to be running against Orange Hitler so one must support the Democratic candidate no matter what or you let Trump in. Maybe they're just so committed to giving their readers the whole truth no matter the consequences that they've fearlessly put their anonymous head above the parapet. But then Google shows that The Independent, NBC, Sky News and others are also running similar stories. Why now, when he's been doing things as crazy as this for at least the last year or so?

I have heard it suggested that Biden isn't going to be the Democratic candidate and that at some point he will drop out or be pushed and they'll somehow parachute in Gavin Newsom. Senior Democrats have figured out that Biden's poll ratings have just been too dire for too long and there's little chance that he can beat Trump so he has to go. Where does a loyal subject like The Guardian saying out loud what everyone knows fit in? Are there elements within the Democrats that want Biden to go but he's resisting? What gives?

[BlodwynPig]

Was there that one where he walks into a bar/restaurant and seems to forget how to walk...where you can see all cognisance dissipate in real time.

[rjd2]

This is a bit surprising as surely The Graun realises that Biden is likely to be running against Orange Hitler so one must support the Democratic candidate no matter what or you let Trump in. Maybe they're just so committed to giving their readers the whole truth no matter the consequences that they've fearlessly put their anonymous head above the parapet. But then Google shows that The Independent, NBC, Sky News and others are also running similar stories. Why now, when he's been doing things as crazy as this for at least the last year or so?

Trump as pres is great for business I suppose for all these rags so may as well point out the obvious.

I don't think they have an alternative to Joe , Newsom might be to scary for the electoral battleground states and Harris has no base outside donor's.

I read earlier this week that Joe wanted Whitmer as VP which from an electoral POV made sense but was persuaded to go with Harris...oops.

[Oosp]

He's just constantly high off the locks of schoolgirls' hair that he keeps in his pocket to sniff

[Famous Mortimer]

It's not like his age was a surprise in 2020, either. If he was going to drop out, before he won the Democratic nomination would have been preferable, surely?

Any "pushing" will almost certainly lose them the election, no?

[perplexingprocrastinator]

They get paid whether they win or lose, it's very much a game to them.

I heard semi-plausible speculation that were going to swap Brandon for Hil-dawg. I for one would DELIGHT in seeing her lose to Trump twice. Trump is a dangerous cunt obviously but frankly I don't find him much worse than her

[Noodle Lizard]

He's 81 years old. 81, for fuck's sake. Perhaps I'm ageist, but if you asked anyone the ideal age for the person elected to run one of the world's largest powers, I don't think anyone would suggest an octogenarian, or a septuagenarian for that matter.

Our presidential choice, for the second time in a row, is between two (arguably demented) old bastards, despite the fact that some states wouldn't even trust them to drive a car without retaking the test. Most of the Supreme Court are well over the national retirement age as well. Biden is from the generation before boomers, whatever that was. Why are these people running the country in 2024?

[Blinder Data]

I would say it's too late to swap him out. stepping aside would lead to a competition and I don't think the democrats want or are ready for that. if his VP was popular it might have made sense to announce a while ago that he wouldn't run again, but everyone knows trump would eat Kamala Harris alive

the problem with this question is that the answer can't simply be "not biden". as bad as a candidate as he is, I would say he's the least worst option: he has a track record to defend and incumbency on his side. the election will be horrible obvs but I can't see anybody else faring better

[Butchers Blind]

80 year olds are fun to have around to show Saltburn to and telling them how many jaffa cakes are in a pack these days, but running one of the largest powers in the world?

[DelurkedToHelp]

He wasn't even able to remember when his son died.

[Paul Calf]

I think the election might kill one or both of them.

North-Korea-bashing seems to have become popular on social media and Youtube again and while I'd rather live pretty much anywhere than North Korea, Americans have got a fucking nerve having a go at the DPRK when a sizeable proportion of their electorate literally thinks one of the candidates is a living god and the lucky ones face a choice between death and bankruptcy every time they become ill or have an accident.

[Funcrusher]

He's 81 years old. 81, for fuck's sake. Perhaps I'm ageist, but if you asked anyone the ideal age for the person elected to run one of the world's largest powers, I don't think anyone would suggest an octogenarian, or a septuagenarian for that matter.

Our presidential choice, for the second time in a row, is between two (arguably demented) old bastards, despite the fact that some states wouldn't even trust them to drive a car without retaking the test. Most of the Supreme Court are well over the national retirement age as well. Biden is from the generation before boomers, whatever that was. Why are these people running the country in 2024?

It is astounding that in a nation of 340M people this is the best they can do. I guess that it's always been the case that the ultra telegenic types like JFK, Bill Clinton or Obama, which is what they would probably want, have always been very rare within politics. The only explanation for the state the Democrats are in is that the neo-liberal centrist project now only contains utter mediocrity and ineptitude- Starmer's witless Labour are they same, devoid of any ideas, not even basically competent. I can kind of see how they end up with Biden in 2020 - they obviously refuse to give Sanders the nomination and pull every lever to destroy him. Biden is the last ex VP, has an established base so Stop Sanders coheres around him. But it must surely have been apparent behind the scenes that Biden was already gaga, and only going to get worse. He made it through debates with Trump, just, and the US was mostly terrified Trump was going to kill everyone by doing nothing about Covid so they made it over the line.

But surely you would see that going forward Biden was only going to get worse cognitively, he's probably even less lucid behind closed doors before he has his meds. By 2024 he's going to be 81. So you would want to plan a succession, probably by putting that person in as VP. Instead they put in Kamala Harris, popular with literally no one and invisible for the last four years. Gavin Newsom is maybe the least worst they have. There is no obvious successor to Biden, but it's clear that a lot of his utterly terrible poll ratings are because people can see he's a cabbage, which just isn't fixable and every time he appears in public it becomes more obvious. Clearly they should have had him stand down with some spiel about a dodgy ticker long ago. They've fucked themselves.

And all this being said, why is The Guardian drawing attention to this, when every day they're running stories about the dangers of Trump? There's no way for Biden's senility to be reversed, the only solution is for him to stand down. But it's very late in the day for that. 

[iamcoop]

Just from a human level I find it disturbing to watch someone being wheeled out at public events when they're clutching at stable surfaces to hold onto and don't even know where the fuck they are. Just nodding off mid convo. Remember that debate he did where one of his eyes just burst and started bleeding halfway through? And that's before you even take into account the whole "trying to be the leader of the free world" shit.

Just absolutely wild that this is the acceptable state of politics at the moment.

[jobotic]

Yeah this all true but a president called Gavin???

[DelurkedToHelp]

He wasn't even able to remember when his son died.

"Hamas made me forget the year of my son's death"

Robert Hur's interviews with Biden were on October 8th and October 9th...days if not hours after the October 7th Hamas attack. If he seemed distracted, there is a pretty good reason why that doesn't require Hur to speculate on what conclusion a fictitious jury might have.

https://twitter.com/TVietor08/status/1755688619992547783

[Funcrusher]

So this seems to be tied to the announcement in the last few hours of the results of the investigation into Biden holding onto classified documents, which has ruled that he did it but they're not going to prosecute. The Graun reports that

Special counsel worried jurors would see Biden 'as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory'
Special counsel Robert Hur wrote that he was concerned jurors would not believe that Joe Biden "willfully" kept classified documents, and that was one of the reasons why he does not think the president should face charges.

"We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory," Hur writes.

"Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him – by then a former president well into his eighties – of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."

Hur wrote that: "Mr. Biden's memory was significantly limited, both during his recorded interviews with the ghostwriter in 2017, and in his interview with our office in 2023. And his cooperation with our investigation, including by reporting to the government that the Afghanistan documents were in his Delaware garage, will likely convince some jurors that he made an innocent mistake, rather than acting willfully – that is, with intent to break the law – as the statute requires.

"

[Funcrusher]

That's surely pretty damning to his competence to hold the highest office in US government?

[Mobius]

i guess this special counsel must be republican because (whilst entirely true) saying that about your current president seems kind of nuts

[Noodle Lizard]

Regarding Newsom, I live in his state, and "least worst" is being very generous. The man is scum. Aside from actually looking like a Batman villain, he's one of the more openly corrupt politicians we've had, and has made it abundantly clear he'll let policy be informed by bribes. A lot of his ostensibly "good" measures regarding illegal immigrants are done purely for image, with no real follow-up infrastructure to support them. He'll do things like boldly promise universal healthcare only to quietly walk it back and actually veto bills which would cap insulin prices, or claim to be solving the catastrophic homelessness problem by removing restrictions for real estate developers whilst vetoing bills which would expand access to housing assistance.

He's purely a careerist, whose aim is simply to ascend to the White House. It doesn't matter what state he leaves California in.

[bgmnts]

As bad as we have it here, look at the two options those poor yank cunts have.

Fuck me dead.

[Psybro]

Weekend at Brandon's

I don't think there's any reason an 81-year-old has to be an absolute state.  Just that this guy is.

[rjd2]

I would say it's too late to swap him out. stepping aside would lead to a competition and I don't think the democrats want or are ready for that. if his VP was popular it might have made sense to announce a while ago that he wouldn't run again, but everyone knows trump would eat Kamala Harris alive

the problem with this question is that the answer can't simply be "not biden". as bad as a candidate as he is, I would say he's the least worst option: he has a track record to defend and incumbency on his side. the election will be horrible obvs but I can't see anybody else faring better

Supposedly he wanted Whitmer to be VP and she would have been a solid VP to pass the baton to after his 1st term but obviously they went with Harris and here we are.

[DelurkedToHelp]

Supposedly he wanted Whitmer to be VP and she would have been a solid VP to pass the baton to after his 1st term but obviously they went with Harris and here we are.

Whitmer seems to spend a fortune on "corporate welfare" aka bribes to stop companies leaving Michigan. It feels like a pack of cards that will collapse at some point, just a question of whether it happens while she's still Governor or not.

As for Newsom, it's a lot of hype for a Democrat that's elected in California of all places. It's a bit like Burnham being jazzed up for being comfortably elected Labour mayor in that famously Tory-leaning area of Greater Manchester.

[Mobius]

they can't run with newsom. his ex wife is engaged to donald trump jr. donald will call him a cuck

[Funcrusher]

Regarding Newsom, I live in his state, and "least worst" is being very generous. The man is scum. Aside from actually looking like a Batman villain, he's one of the more openly corrupt politicians we've had, and has made it abundantly clear he'll let policy be informed by bribes. A lot of his ostensibly "good" measures regarding illegal immigrants are done purely for image, with no real follow-up infrastructure to support them. He'll do things like boldly promise universal healthcare only to quietly walk it back and actually veto bills which would cap insulin prices, or claim to be solving the catastrophic homelessness problem by removing restrictions for real estate developers whilst vetoing bills which would expand access to housing assistance.

He's purely a careerist, whose aim is simply to ascend to the White House. It doesn't matter what state he leaves California in.

I was only assessing him in terms of how presentable he is - he has pretty much zero charisma from what I've seen, but maybe 1per cent more than Buttigieg. I'm sure you're right that he's a cunt.

[Noodle Lizard]

I was only assessing him in terms of how presentable he is - he has pretty much zero charisma from what I've seen, but maybe 1per cent more than Buttigieg. I'm sure you're right that he's a cunt.

Oh absolutely, he's tailor-made for the current DNC.

[superthunderstingcar]

This is a bit surprising as surely The Graun realises that Biden is likely to be running against Orange Hitler so one must support the Democratic candidate no matter what or you let Trump in.

And all this being said, why is The Guardian drawing attention to this, when every day they're running stories about the dangers of Trump?

Nobody in America reads The Guardian.

[JesusAndYourBush]

Saw a clip of him on tv yesterday just fucking standing there doing nothing when he was supposed to be speaking. Nobody was home, like a reanimated corpse.

[shoulders]

The electoral base are also disproportionately decrepit cunts so when they see Biden going Goo goo gaa gaa and asking a potato the time they think One Of Us.

[RottonRaddish]

Because legislation is fucking boring. This is why they love Trump, Farrage and most obviously Johnson. They are shielded from any policies they make but their job becomes easier because the monkey does the work for them. Why report of the ins and outs of a bill when you can report on outrageous claims the personality makes.

Looking back it was easily the worst thing that having Nick Griffin of Question Time brought upon us. Ground Zero for this type of excuse for mainstream political discourse.