Re: Politico says it out loud about Biden

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (24)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 1

But those aren't the goal posts you laid out. You questioned whether Biden was making his own decisions, not whether he might have difficulty with fulfilling his duties if he were re-elected.

Indeed I did, and he's having difficulty doing his job right now.

nytimes.com - Biden public appearances media
https://archive.is/YkCdL

On Thursday, President Gustavo Petro of Colombia met with Mr. Biden, but the two did not hold a news conference together, another practice of his predecessors that Mr. Biden has frequently chosen to skip. After the meeting, Mr. Petro took questions from reporters — alone — at microphones in front of the West Wing.
And despite his press secretary pledging that Mr. Biden would “bring transparency and truth back to the government,” in his first two years, the president granted the fewest interviews since Mr. Reagan’s presidency: only 54. (Donald J. Trump gave 202 during the first two years of his presidency; Barack Obama gave 275.)

Back to the thread:
The democratic party - like the GOP - is a coalition. There are different factions in the coalition, and Team Biden is only one of them. Other factions - like the old Clintonian group that Carville's a part of - have their own political interests and goals, and it's advantageous for them to take some minor shots at Biden to set themselves up for whatever happens after his Presidency. So too with Obamaworld. But that doesn't mean that anyone in the party has the ability to "veto" Biden's decision whether to run for the nomination or not, nor the ability to deny him the nomination if he chooses to run.

There are a lot of people with influence in the democrat party (and in the GOP). Superdelegates. The people with the money. Unions. Party honchos like Axelrod. More. All of them are going to look at Biden and do a risk/benefit analysis of dumping the nearly $1 billion dollars it costs to elect a US President.

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post Share: X · FacebookFB · LinkedInLI · WhatsAppWApp · Email

Members reply directly to Dope1 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »

This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:

It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025

G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026

Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026

HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025

Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (24)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website The Motley Fool (TMF) in any way. The Shrewd community here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.