"Creepy Joe" Biden's basement campaign

I didn't think the Democrats could come up with a worse candidate than Hillary Clinton.

And then they made Joe Biden the "presumptive nominee".

Hillary needed to be roped off to keep her away from the public. Joe Biden needs to be stuck in a basement to keep him from the public.

Biden's campaign knows this is a good strategy. Their basic campaign strategy is to have Biden "stay alive" and hope Trump Derangement Syndrome delivers him the presidency. That's because even Biden will tell you to examine his record and if you don't like what you see, then you should vote for the other guy!

Biden does best as Max Headroom, the virtual candidate who spouts nonsense. He has to do interviews with friendly media. Even Rachel Maddow was pleading for Biden to show himself a while back. Covid-19 provides the perfect reason for being in the basement. Or so it would seem.

There are better reasons why Joe Biden is Hidin' Biden, and Covid-19 isn't one of them. The record of misconduct with women which is a reverse Brett Kavanaugh (Blasey Ford was the first women to complain about Kavanaugh. Tara Reade is one of many women who have complained about Biden.). The Dems will try and sweep this under the carpet, but it only makes the #metoo a hollow slogan if they run Biden.

Biden being the "presumptive nominee" stinks given that his record is out there for examination. Nathan J. Robinson's Democrats, You Do NOT Want To Nominate Joe Biden is out there in more than enough forms to not be ignored.



There is more than enough material out there on why making Biden the nominee was a mistake. The basement campaign may seem like the answer, but running something that has been stuck away in an attic or basement really isn't the answer.

Anyway, don't blame anybody or anything other than the Democratic establishment if the result is another four years of Donald Trump.

Why Tara Reade's allegations against Joe Biden matter: even if you want to wish them away.

Joe Biden should not be the "presumptive" nominee, let alone the actual nominee. He has run at least two previous campaigns which he lost (1988 and 2008). His campaign was considered dead until Barack Obama made a few phone calls which resulted in the opposition pulling out. Sanders ended up putting his campaign in limbo, although some die hards plan on voting for him if they can in upcoming primaries.

But Biden's ascendency has made it even more obvious that the primary process is a sham. An otherwise dead candidacy has become the "presumptive nominee" while someone who ran a couple of the most popular campaigns ever is shut out of the process. Not that this should come as a surprise for anyone who is a true progressive since the Democratic Party has long held a disdain for anyone who is truly progressive.

Saying that Biden is like FDR is a total joke since the candidate politically most like FDR, Sanders, was shut out of the race. FDR had to fight to get what little of his New Deal agenda he could past the establishment Democrats of the 1930s and 1940s. But all that is not as salient as to WHY Biden should not be the nominee.

There are loads of reasons Biden should not be the nominee, and Tara Reade is only one of many examples of Biden's issues with "unwanted attention" to women. It is not nothing anyone familiar with Biden didn't know: as this clip from John Stewart's Daily Show from 24 February 2015 shows.

It's one thing to try and write off Tara Reade, but Reade is in no way the first unlike Christine Blasey Ford, Brett Kavanaugh's accuser. These accusations against Biden are nothing new. If anything, they are so prevalent that wilful ignorance by Biden supporters makes their #metoo hypocrisy nauseating.

Although, one can accept Biden's being as bad, if not worse than Trump, yet also be willing to vote for Biden by showing their Trump Derangment Syndrome. The simple explanation is that "Trump is bad" works for them.

Not that there aren't alternatives. Sticking by Biden is where the hypocrisy is most annoying given his history with this issue.

I Demexited in 2016. Although, I registered Democrat again to vote for Sanders in the hope that might make a difference (so much for your argument for "Closed Primaries"). True, registering as a Democrat was a waste. I will again vote Green this year since it gets harder and harder to vote for a duopoly candidate.

But don't blame those of us who are willing to vote Third Party if your candidate loses. The writing is on the wall for Joe Biden. It has been since the failed effort at impeachment made it clear that Biden was as corrupt as Trump (still crickets from Burisma in regard to my job application). Biden is a loser. Biden is even more of a loser in light of the current situation with Covid 19 (I felt a need to be more specific since Biden is a loser in general).

And don't blame anybody but yourselves when Trump is reelected.

I bet most of the critics can't read French.

I woke up to some interesting news this morning: the French Actress, Catherine Deneuve, and 99 other women, wrote a piece condemning the blanket #metoo. Catherine Deneuve is probably one of the few of these women most Anglophones are familiar with as an international film star. On the other hand, there are another 99 other women who signed this piece who come from varying points of view.

They also aren't as well known outside France.

First off, the article makes it clear that there is a difference between rape and sexual harassment with maladroit flirtation and gallantry. Maybe non-Gallic women don't like having the door held for them, but French women tend to expect it.

Secondly, most of the English language coverage I have seen of this tends to focus on the most well known signer of this letter, but 99 other women also signed this critique of the #metoo phenomenon.

The most important part is that the writers try to distinguish between sexual violence and men being awkward. The difference between a grope and an accident. The gist of the argument here seems to be:

 In the same way, we defend a freedom to annoy, indispensable to the sexual freedom. We are now sufficiently warned to declare that the sexual drive is by nature offensive and savage, but we are also sufficiently clairvoyant not to confuse clumsy flirtation with sexual assault.

I'm not sure this can be seen as "mansplaining" as much as it is translation and cultural interpretation.  Especially since I see most of the critics probably haven't read the letter in its original French, or they don't understand the cultural under currents of this letter. Catherine Deneuve, star of Belle de Jour which is about sexual fantasy, as the face of this argument.

But there is much more to this letter than the Anglophone media lets on which needs to be addressed in this debate without resorting to an ad hominem toward one of the signers. People need to get the whole story before they comment since this letter addresses an important part of the debate.

The actual letter is here:
www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2018/01/09/nous-defendons-une-liberte-d-importuner-indispensable-a-la-liberte-sexuelle_5239134_3232.html

I'm not sure if the commenters will bother reading it since that seems to be the case with most of the people I hear discussing the letter.