How Long Will Biden Last? Full Term? Two? - Page 3

acbytesla · 31st October 2020, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

True but it’s an antiquated qualification. Only 1 of them served during a war that wasn’t fought on horseback.

Still not sure why it isn't good experience. Generally speaking, (opportunistic pun) Generals are still a link in the chain. They give orders and they obey orders. Eisenhower was made CINC Allied Forces Europe because he was organized and was diplomatic, not because he was a fighter. That served him well. I give you that Patton, MacArthur, or Montgomery would have made terrible heads of State, but Ike, Marshall, Bradley seem to understand there is more to being a leader than just giving orders.

TragicMonkey · 31st October 2020, 02:43 PM

Although there has been a wide range of quality in past presidents, and it doesn't seem to directly correlate with prior careers, I'm comfortable crossing "reality TV star" off the list of jobs a president could reasonably have had before office. We were better off with ex-prostitutes like Fillmore and Hayes.

Stacyhs · 31st October 2020, 02:49 PM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

Still not sure why it isn't good experience. Generally speaking, (opportunistic pun) Generals are still a link in the chain. They give orders and they obey orders. Eisenhower was made CINC Allied Forces Europe because he was organized and was diplomatic, not because he was a fighter. That served him well. I give you that Patton, MacArthur, or Montgomery both would have made terrible heads of State, but Ike, Marshall, Bradley seem to understand there is more to being a leader than just giving orders.

It's good experience, it's just not government experience which I think a POTUS needs. You don't start at the top. I doubt Lt. Eisenhower would have made the same decisions as CINC Allied Forces Europe as Gen. Eisenhower did. Experience made the difference.

acbytesla · 31st October 2020, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

It's good experience, it's just not government experience which I think a POTUS needs. You don't start at the top. I doubt Lt. Eisenhower would have made the same decisions as CINC Allied Forces Europe as Gen. Eisenhower did. Experience made the difference.

Maybe, but I don't view it as disqualifying.

But it doesn't seem to me that many ex-generals are much interested in politics. The last one I can remember running was Eisenhower. MacArthur acted like a candidate, but never actually ran. Maybe someone I don't recall ran since then, but I don't recall anyone. People pushed Colin Powell to run, but he didn't.

DevilsAdvocate · 31st October 2020, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

Maybe, but I don't view it as disqualifying.

But it doesn't seem to me that many ex-generals are much interested in politics. The last one I can remember running was Eisenhower. MacArthur acted like a candidate, but never actually ran. Maybe someone I don't recall ran since then, but I don't recall anyone. People pushed Colin Powell to run, but he didn't.

General Wesley Clark ran in 2004.

Stacyhs · 31st October 2020, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

Maybe, but I don't view it as disqualifying.

But it doesn't seem to me that many ex-generals are much interested in politics. The last one I can remember running was Eisenhower. MacArthur acted like a candidate, but never actually ran. Maybe someone I don't recall ran since then, but I don't recall anyone. People pushed Colin Powell to run, but he didn't.

I don't believe anyone has claimed it as being disqualifying.

dirtywick · 31st October 2020, 05:58 PM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

Still not sure why it isn't good experience. Generally speaking, (opportunistic pun) Generals are still a link in the chain. They give orders and they obey orders. Eisenhower was made CINC Allied Forces Europe because he was organized and was diplomatic, not because he was a fighter. That served him well. I give you that Patton, MacArthur, or Montgomery would have made terrible heads of State, but Ike, Marshall, Bradley seem to understand there is more to being a leader than just giving orders.

I think a hypothetical general could be a good president, but I’m not sure that being a general is a good work experience for the role necessarily. They live in a giant bureaucratic bubble where the government attends to their daily needs. They have no experience in what it’s like to be an American.

Trebuchet · 31st October 2020, 06:20 PM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Huh? You can be older than your uncle. How does it work then?

My wife was older than her uncle. "Was", because he's already dead.

Regnad Kcin · 31st October 2020, 07:02 PM

The baby boom was not a generation, per se. As indicated below, it’s a descriptive term for a particular demographic.

acbytesla · 31st October 2020, 07:12 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

I think a hypothetical general could be a good president, but I’m not sure that being a general is a good work experience for the role necessarily. They live in a giant bureaucratic bubble where the government attends to their daily needs. They have no experience in what it’s like to be an American.

Is that highlighted line some kind of sarcasm?

I agree that someone who went to West Point, Annapolis or any other military academy and had a career in the military hasn't had a typical life experience, but to go so far as to say they have no experience of what it's like to be an American is ridiculous and frankly insulting.

Now, I firmly believe the United States military is a bloated institution and far too many Generals and Colonels retire from the military to work for the military industrial complex. That said, most of these people that I know in the military have a great love of this country. Most are very principled.

acbytesla · 31st October 2020, 07:14 PM

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

General Wesley Clark ran in 2004.

You're right. Thanks.

acbytesla · 31st October 2020, 07:20 PM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Yeah, but most of those were old-timey presidents. Eisenhower was the most recent, right? And that was quite a while ago.

eta: I look forward the wrangle on the exact definitions of "a while" and "quite a while".

Ike was the last. The rest were in the 19th and 18th centuries

angrysoba · 31st October 2020, 07:46 PM

Okay, last time:

Tragic Monkey: "I go with the definition of Boomers that means post WW2 babies. Literally the baby boom from returning soldiers." (there's no wiggle room there! That's your definition. You even threw in a "literally")

Me: He was born in 1942.

Tragic Monkey: Yeah, well he's still a Boomer because 1942 is closer than 1964 (huh?), and what about the siblings and the uncles and champagne and Jello??? Huh? Didn't think about that, did you smartypants!!??!?!

Me: Jelly!

TragicMonkey · 31st October 2020, 08:22 PM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Okay, last time:

Tragic Monkey: "I go with the definition of Boomers that means post WW2 babies. Literally the baby boom from returning soldiers." (there's no wiggle room there! That's your definition. You even threw in a "literally")

Me: He was born in 1942.

Tragic Monkey: Yeah, well he's still a Boomer because 1942 is closer than 1964 (huh?), and what about the siblings and the uncles and champagne and Jello??? Huh? Didn't think about that, did you smartypants!!??!?!

Me: Jelly!

Are you wanting a cookie because you knew Biden's exact year of birth and I didn't? Here is your cookie. I still consider that, for all useful categorization purposes, Biden's a Boomer. Because he shares more with that age cohort than he does with the preceding bunch. It's an opinion about a fuzzy social science meme, not a scientific or legal fact that can be proven or disproven. Biden is close enough to a Boomer that I see no point in excessive insistence that he is not. I really wonder why this seems to put you into such a stir.

angrysoba · 31st October 2020, 08:44 PM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Are you wanting a cookie because you knew Biden's exact year of birth and I didn't? Here is your cookie. I still consider that, for all useful categorization purposes, Biden's a Boomer. Because he shares more with that age cohort than he does with the preceding bunch. It's an opinion about a fuzzy social science meme, not a scientific or legal fact that can be proven or disproven. Biden is close enough to a Boomer that I see no point in excessive insistence that he is not. I really wonder why this seems to put you into such a stir.

I don't want a cookie, but I find the whole "yeah, but really he is a Boomer" thing to be just weird.

I don't understand why people do this kind of thing, just dig into position that directly contradicts a previous position.

I don't know what happened to "Oh yeah, I didn't realize that. Thanks."

TragicMonkey · 31st October 2020, 08:48 PM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

I don't want a cookie, but I find the whole "yeah, but really he is a Boomer" thing to be just weird.

I don't understand why people do this kind of thing, just dig into position that directly contradicts a previous position.

I don't know what happened to "Oh yeah, I didn't realize that. Thanks."

Well, thanks for pointing out Biden's year of birth was during, and not after, WWII. But I still consider him to be a Boomer anyway, for the reasons I've stated several times above. So if you're demanding I agree with you that will simply not happen.

angrysoba · 31st October 2020, 09:40 PM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Well, thanks for pointing out Biden's year of birth was during, and not after, WWII. But I still consider him to be a Boomer anyway, for the reasons I've stated several times above. So if you're demanding I agree with you that will simply not happen.

Ok Boomer

dirtywick · 31st October 2020, 10:55 PM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

Is that highlighted line some kind of sarcasm?

I agree that someone who went to West Point, Annapolis or any other military academy and had a career in the military hasn't had a typical life experience, but to go so far as to say they have no experience of what it's like to be an American is ridiculous and frankly insulting.

Now, I firmly believe the United States military is a bloated institution and far too many Generals and Colonels retire from the military to work for the military industrial complex. That said, most of these people that I know in the military have a great love of this country. Most are very principled.

And all that’s fine. But they live in military communities and command military personnel that live under different laws. The government provides them food, shelter, and healthcare. They go to different military only schools. They have their own news papers and TV networks. Their own banks and insurance companies. They get a different retirement package. They disappear from their families for months at a time to go train or work overseas. They speak in acronyms.

Sorry to insult you. I’m a veteran if that makes you feel any better. It’s not that they’re not patriots or principled, it’s that they live in a separate world. They don’t understand what average Americans have to deal with in life because they’re not living the same way. Which is the point, how can a general relate to the average American or even understand what problems they face? They’ve never been out of their bubble.

Regnad Kcin · 1st November 2020, 12:15 AM

Wrapping up this thread sidetrack with a bow, Donald Trump, born in 1946, actually is a boomer.

Mader Levap · 1st November 2020, 05:49 AM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

Which is the point, how can a general relate to the average American or even understand what problems they face? They’ve never been out of their bubble.

In this case, probably no POTUS ever qualified. Politicians and billionaries live in their own bubbles.

dirtywick · 1st November 2020, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by Mader Levap

In this case, probably no POTUS ever qualified. Politicians and billionaries live in their own bubbles.

I’m not going to defend billionaire presidents. Especially those who are born into it. Their life experience isn’t in the same universe as ours. Certainly a good example of how people who live in a bubble govern poorly. Maybe we shouldn’t elect those.

But I do think politician is the best background for a politician.

Mader Levap · 1st November 2020, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

But I do think politician is the best background for a politician.

Politicians are best for politician job, sure, but that does not change fact they have their own bubble.

dirtywick · 1st November 2020, 02:45 PM

Originally Posted by Mader Levap

Politicians are best for politician job, sure, but that does not change fact they have their own bubble.

I don’t think that’s true until the highest levels of government. Most build their careers at a local level for years.

Bob001 · 1st November 2020, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

I’m not going to defend billionaire presidents. Especially those who are born into it. Their life experience isn’t in the same universe as ours. Certainly a good example of how people who live in a bubble govern poorly. Maybe we shouldn’t elect those.
....

Presidents are not typically from rich families. Obama, Bill Clinton, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson and farther back were working/lower-middle class at best. Nixon was bitter all his life that he was admitted to Harvard but couldn't afford to go. LBJ worked construction to get through teachers college. They are characterized by a burning ambition to get ahead. The Bushes were tasteful old money, but far from billionaires, and they also held public service positions for generations. Part of Trump's con is that he is a billionaire (questionable), and that a "successful" businessman, which he is not, could run government as well. Even real billionaires like Jeff Bezos and Michael Bloomberg earned their money; they weren't born into it.

Foggy of the Fogbow · 1st November 2020, 03:12 PM

Trump was such a successful businessman he went bankrupt running a casino.

People think that's easy to do, but IT'S NOT EASY.

Safe-Keeper · 1st November 2020, 03:17 PM

To be honest, I don't care. As long as Biden wins, he can sit as president for two months and then let Harris take over for all I care. Give the USA its first female president, to boot. Granted, she is a person of colour who doesn't fit neatly into a box as she's got dark skin, but isn't African-American, instead hailing from Indian and Jamaican descent, and the trumpkins have already shown that this frustrates them, so she might lead to more polarisation.

But again, as long as Trump doesn't get four (or more) years, a honey badger could win the election for all I care.

Bob001 · 1st November 2020, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

...
Sorry to insult you. I’m a veteran if that makes you feel any better. It’s not that they’re not patriots or principled, it’s that they live in a separate world. They don’t understand what average Americans have to deal with in life because they’re not living the same way. Which is the point, how can a general relate to the average American or even understand what problems they face? They’ve never been out of their bubble.

Can't find a link, but I recall that when Gen. Petraeus took over the CIA, he offended some people by expecting his subordinates to serve him like junior troops did when he was a four-star general. Military experience doesn't always translate to a civilian job.

Bob001 · 1st November 2020, 03:26 PM

Originally Posted by Foggy of the Fogbow

Trump was such a successful businessman he went bankrupt running a casino.

People think that's easy to do, but IT'S NOT EASY.

His biggest mistake was that he was running FOUR casinos. They were taking business from each other in a finite market. If he had focused on one he would have cleaned up.

acbytesla · 1st November 2020, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

To be honest, I don't care. As long as Biden wins, he can sit as president for two months and then let Harris take over for all I care. Give the USA its first female president, to boot. Granted, she is a person of colour who doesn't fit neatly into a box as she's got dark skin, but isn't African-American, instead hailing from Indian and Jamaican descent, and the trumpkins have already shown that this frustrates them, so she might lead to more polarisation.

But again, as long as Trump doesn't get four (or more) years, a honey badger could win the election for all I care.

Where do you think the people of color in Jamaica came from? Her ancestors may not have been enslaved in Africa and sold to plantation owners in Georgia but is there really reason to deny that her heritage is similar?

acbytesla · 1st November 2020, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by Bob001

His biggest mistake was that he was running FOUR casinos. They were taking business from each other in a finite market. If he had focused on one he would have cleaned up.

No, his biggest mistake was taking out shirt term financing of 18 to 20 percent.

Foggy of the Fogbow · 1st November 2020, 03:41 PM

Originally Posted by Bob001

His biggest mistake was that he was running FOUR casinos. They were taking business from each other in a finite market. If he had focused on one he would have cleaned up.

And he had totally unqualified people from his family in key positions, people who had no idea how the casino business works.

I heard he had a really good university, though.

Until he had to pay $25 million because it was a fraud.

Stacyhs · 1st November 2020, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

To be honest, I don't care. As long as Biden wins, he can sit as president for two months and then let Harris take over for all I care. Give the USA its first female president, to boot. Granted, she is a person of colour who doesn't fit neatly into a box as she's got dark skin, but isn't African-American, instead hailing from Indian and Jamaican descent, and the trumpkins have already shown that this frustrates them, so she might lead to more polarisation.

But again, as long as Trump doesn't get four (or more) years, a honey badger could win the election for all I care.

Honey badger don't care.

KDLarsen · 1st November 2020, 04:17 PM

I could've sworn I read somewhere that Biden had committed to a single term, to clean up trump's mess before leaving the stage for someone younger and - perhaps - more progressive, but I may have confused it with Pelosi promising this term would be her last in exchange for becoming speaker once again.

I suspect Biden is well aware that just as people were voting against Clinton in 2016, a lot of his votes this time around will be from people voting against trump. Depending on who the republicans pick in 2024, he would face a much steeper challenge then, at age 80+ he'd probably feel he was too old for such a fight.

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Huh? You can be older than your uncle. How does it work then?

I like to weird people out by pointing out my half-uncle is only 2 months older than me

(my grandfather divorced my grandmother and married his secretary, my half-uncle was the result of that union)

crescent · 1st November 2020, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by KDLarsen

I could've sworn I read somewhere that Biden had committed to a single term,

That's going around the net for almost a year now but there's never been any confirmation of it. He's never limited himself to a single term, not publicly at least.

Biden denies speculation of a one-term pledge

The current disinformation campaign seems to be trying to get the story going again, you're not the first person I've seen mention it in the past few days. It's tied to the Trump's campaign strategy of getting people to think that Biden is too old and possibly senile.

Delvo · 1st November 2020, 05:42 PM

He never committed one way or the other. But if he runs for re-election against somebody who isn't Trump, he'll lose.

That's why I'm more interested in Harris for 2024. Apparently she was rather progressive in the Senate, which I didn't believe at first because she sounds so conservative now. So why the reversal, and is it rereversible?

Distracted1 · 2nd November 2020, 06:45 AM

Originally Posted by Brainster

IMHO it is a foregone conclusion that Trump is out January 20th and Biden is in. But for how long? The entire Democratic establishment must be relieved that covid has turned this into a virtual campaign, where Biden's appearances can be more easily monitored and where he doesn't get into the rhetorical weeds.

But afterwards, when it turns time to govern? Pelosi has suddenly been talking about the 25th Amendment:

It seems to me more likely that she's greasing the skids for Biden's likely removal at some point after the election. Obviously I have no real way of telling how much compos Biden has over his mentis. My dad was fine at that age, but you didn't want him driving after late afternoon or anytime he might be tired. Keep in mind, that Biden will be older on inauguration day than Reagan was the day he left the White House.

BTW, I'm not trying to be snide with the grease the skids comment, or conspiracy minded. It does seem quite reasonable to ask the questions about this. I was more thinking that Pelosi's sudden renewed urgency on this matter indicates that maybe Biden's mental state is deteriorating.

Biden has a solitary task to complete before he goes to his reward: Win the election.

After that, I suspect the state of the nation will be such that he is incapacitated or dead within a few months.

President Harris will inherit the odious task of captaining the Titanic after the iceburg has already been struck.

Crossbow · 2nd November 2020, 06:50 AM

As for me, I sure do hope that Joe Biden has a long and healthy life.

But as long as long as Biden stays alive long enough to beat Trump like a drum and get him out of the White House, then that will be quite successful indeed.

Horatius · 2nd November 2020, 07:10 AM

Originally Posted by Bob001

His biggest mistake was that he was running FOUR casinos. They were taking business from each other in a finite market. If he had focused on one he would have cleaned up.

I've heard that argument, and creating your own competition is pretty stupid, but wouldn't other casino operators have likely filled one or more of those places if he hadn't? If he couldn't even compete against himself and win, he'd have likely tanked no matter what.

theprestige · 2nd November 2020, 07:44 AM

Originally Posted by Bob001

His biggest mistake was that he was running FOUR casinos. They were taking business from each other in a finite market. If he had focused on one he would have cleaned up.

This assumes the market was saturated at the time.

portlandatheist · 6th November 2020, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Trump will win again and if the Billionaire Cartel tries to steal it there will be hell on earth. Joe Biden will never see a day in office.

That's my opinion. We do remember the "Hillary is done" thread where it was a running joke to chime in and say "is she done yet?". But after she was done, it wasn't any fun anymore, although I posted so many Ben Garrison cartoons and predicted that Trump will win. But parallel reality was unfolding forcefully with claims of "The Russians" having been behind the eerie failure of Media bubble to predict reality. And all this nonsense is now "debunked" - we recently found out who wrote the bogus "Steele dossier", have you noticed? If not, maybe use yandex instead of google to find it out.

I simply don't think that the American people are as stupid as the Billionaire Cartel thinks they are, and that it will be possible to fake a victory of the corrupt, senile Zombie Biden in 2020. We will see.

Ha Ha!

31st October 2020, 02:41 PM	#81
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,597	Originally Posted by dirtywick True but it’s an antiquated qualification. Only 1 of them served during a war that wasn’t fought on horseback. Still not sure why it isn't good experience. Generally speaking, (opportunistic pun) Generals are still a link in the chain. They give orders and they obey orders. Eisenhower was made CINC Allied Forces Europe because he was organized and was diplomatic, not because he was a fighter. That served him well. I give you that Patton, MacArthur, or Montgomery would have made terrible heads of State, but Ike, Marshall, Bradley seem to understand there is more to being a leader than just giving orders.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. . Last edited by acbytesla; 31st October 2020 at 03:05 PM.

31st October 2020, 02:43 PM	#82
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,759	Although there has been a wide range of quality in past presidents, and it doesn't seem to directly correlate with prior careers, I'm comfortable crossing "reality TV star" off the list of jobs a president could reasonably have had before office. We were better off with ex-prostitutes like Fillmore and Hayes.
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

31st October 2020, 03:29 PM	#84
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,597	Originally Posted by Stacyhs It's good experience, it's just not government experience which I think a POTUS needs. You don't start at the top. I doubt Lt. Eisenhower would have made the same decisions as CINC Allied Forces Europe as Gen. Eisenhower did. Experience made the difference. Maybe, but I don't view it as disqualifying. But it doesn't seem to me that many ex-generals are much interested in politics. The last one I can remember running was Eisenhower. MacArthur acted like a candidate, but never actually ran. Maybe someone I don't recall ran since then, but I don't recall anyone. People pushed Colin Powell to run, but he didn't.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. . Last edited by acbytesla; 31st October 2020 at 03:30 PM.

31st October 2020, 03:36 PM	#85
DevilsAdvocate Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,630	Originally Posted by acbytesla Maybe, but I don't view it as disqualifying. But it doesn't seem to me that many ex-generals are much interested in politics. The last one I can remember running was Eisenhower. MacArthur acted like a candidate, but never actually ran. Maybe someone I don't recall ran since then, but I don't recall anyone. People pushed Colin Powell to run, but he didn't. General Wesley Clark ran in 2004.
	__________________ I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. - Baba O'Riley

31st October 2020, 05:58 PM	#87
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,358	Originally Posted by acbytesla Still not sure why it isn't good experience. Generally speaking, (opportunistic pun) Generals are still a link in the chain. They give orders and they obey orders. Eisenhower was made CINC Allied Forces Europe because he was organized and was diplomatic, not because he was a fighter. That served him well. I give you that Patton, MacArthur, or Montgomery would have made terrible heads of State, but Ike, Marshall, Bradley seem to understand there is more to being a leader than just giving orders. I think a hypothetical general could be a good president, but I’m not sure that being a general is a good work experience for the role necessarily. They live in a giant bureaucratic bubble where the government attends to their daily needs. They have no experience in what it’s like to be an American.
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,358

31st October 2020, 02:49 PM	#83
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 18,246	Originally Posted by acbytesla Still not sure why it isn't good experience. Generally speaking, (opportunistic pun) Generals are still a link in the chain. They give orders and they obey orders. Eisenhower was made CINC Allied Forces Europe because he was organized and was diplomatic, not because he was a fighter. That served him well. I give you that Patton, MacArthur, or Montgomery both would have made terrible heads of State, but Ike, Marshall, Bradley seem to understand there is more to being a leader than just giving orders. It's good experience, it's just not government experience which I think a POTUS needs. You don't start at the top. I doubt Lt. Eisenhower would have made the same decisions as CINC Allied Forces Europe as Gen. Eisenhower did. Experience made the difference.

31st October 2020, 03:45 PM	#86
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 18,246	Originally Posted by acbytesla Maybe, but I don't view it as disqualifying. But it doesn't seem to me that many ex-generals are much interested in politics. The last one I can remember running was Eisenhower. MacArthur acted like a candidate, but never actually ran. Maybe someone I don't recall ran since then, but I don't recall anyone. People pushed Colin Powell to run, but he didn't. I don't believe anyone has claimed it as being disqualifying.

31st October 2020, 06:20 PM	#88
Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Port Townsend, Washington Posts: 31,339	Originally Posted by angrysoba Huh? You can be older than your uncle. How does it work then? My wife was older than her uncle. "Was", because he's already dead.
	__________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

31st October 2020, 07:12 PM	#90
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,597	Originally Posted by dirtywick I think a hypothetical general could be a good president, but I’m not sure that being a general is a good work experience for the role necessarily. They live in a giant bureaucratic bubble where the government attends to their daily needs. They have no experience in what it’s like to be an American. Is that highlighted line some kind of sarcasm? I agree that someone who went to West Point, Annapolis or any other military academy and had a career in the military hasn't had a typical life experience, but to go so far as to say they have no experience of what it's like to be an American is ridiculous and frankly insulting. Now, I firmly believe the United States military is a bloated institution and far too many Generals and Colonels retire from the military to work for the military industrial complex. That said, most of these people that I know in the military have a great love of this country. Most are very principled.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

31st October 2020, 07:14 PM	#91
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,597	Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate General Wesley Clark ran in 2004. You're right. Thanks.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

31st October 2020, 07:20 PM	#92
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,597	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey Yeah, but most of those were old-timey presidents. Eisenhower was the most recent, right? And that was quite a while ago. eta: I look forward the wrangle on the exact definitions of "a while" and "quite a while". Ike was the last. The rest were in the 19th and 18th centuries
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

31st October 2020, 07:46 PM	#93
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 29,637	Okay, last time: Tragic Monkey: "I go with the definition of Boomers that means post WW2 babies. Literally the baby boom from returning soldiers." (there's no wiggle room there! That's your definition. You even threw in a "literally") Me: He was born in 1942. Tragic Monkey: Yeah, well he's still a Boomer because 1942 is closer than 1964 (huh?), and what about the siblings and the uncles and champagne and Jello??? Huh? Didn't think about that, did you smartypants!!??!?! Me: Jelly!
	__________________ "The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before." "Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)

31st October 2020, 08:22 PM	#94
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,759	Originally Posted by angrysoba Okay, last time: Tragic Monkey: "I go with the definition of Boomers that means post WW2 babies. Literally the baby boom from returning soldiers." (there's no wiggle room there! That's your definition. You even threw in a "literally") Me: He was born in 1942. Tragic Monkey: Yeah, well he's still a Boomer because 1942 is closer than 1964 (huh?), and what about the siblings and the uncles and champagne and Jello??? Huh? Didn't think about that, did you smartypants!!??!?! Me: Jelly! Are you wanting a cookie because you knew Biden's exact year of birth and I didn't? Here is your cookie. I still consider that, for all useful categorization purposes, Biden's a Boomer. Because he shares more with that age cohort than he does with the preceding bunch. It's an opinion about a fuzzy social science meme, not a scientific or legal fact that can be proven or disproven. Biden is close enough to a Boomer that I see no point in excessive insistence that he is not. I really wonder why this seems to put you into such a stir.
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

31st October 2020, 08:44 PM	#95
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 29,637	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey Are you wanting a cookie because you knew Biden's exact year of birth and I didn't? Here is your cookie. I still consider that, for all useful categorization purposes, Biden's a Boomer. Because he shares more with that age cohort than he does with the preceding bunch. It's an opinion about a fuzzy social science meme, not a scientific or legal fact that can be proven or disproven. Biden is close enough to a Boomer that I see no point in excessive insistence that he is not. I really wonder why this seems to put you into such a stir. I don't want a cookie, but I find the whole "yeah, but really he is a Boomer" thing to be just weird. I don't understand why people do this kind of thing, just dig into position that directly contradicts a previous position. I don't know what happened to "Oh yeah, I didn't realize that. Thanks."
	__________________ "The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before." "Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)

31st October 2020, 08:48 PM	#96
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,759	Originally Posted by angrysoba I don't want a cookie, but I find the whole "yeah, but really he is a Boomer" thing to be just weird. I don't understand why people do this kind of thing, just dig into position that directly contradicts a previous position. I don't know what happened to "Oh yeah, I didn't realize that. Thanks." Well, thanks for pointing out Biden's year of birth was during, and not after, WWII. But I still consider him to be a Boomer anyway, for the reasons I've stated several times above. So if you're demanding I agree with you that will simply not happen.
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

31st October 2020, 09:40 PM	#97
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 29,637	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey Well, thanks for pointing out Biden's year of birth was during, and not after, WWII. But I still consider him to be a Boomer anyway, for the reasons I've stated several times above. So if you're demanding I agree with you that will simply not happen. Ok Boomer
	__________________ "The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before." "Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)

31st October 2020, 10:55 PM	#98
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,358	Originally Posted by acbytesla Is that highlighted line some kind of sarcasm? I agree that someone who went to West Point, Annapolis or any other military academy and had a career in the military hasn't had a typical life experience, but to go so far as to say they have no experience of what it's like to be an American is ridiculous and frankly insulting. Now, I firmly believe the United States military is a bloated institution and far too many Generals and Colonels retire from the military to work for the military industrial complex. That said, most of these people that I know in the military have a great love of this country. Most are very principled. And all that’s fine. But they live in military communities and command military personnel that live under different laws. The government provides them food, shelter, and healthcare. They go to different military only schools. They have their own news papers and TV networks. Their own banks and insurance companies. They get a different retirement package. They disappear from their families for months at a time to go train or work overseas. They speak in acronyms. Sorry to insult you. I’m a veteran if that makes you feel any better. It’s not that they’re not patriots or principled, it’s that they live in a separate world. They don’t understand what average Americans have to deal with in life because they’re not living the same way. Which is the point, how can a general relate to the average American or even understand what problems they face? They’ve never been out of their bubble.
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,358

1st November 2020, 12:15 AM	#99
Regnad Kcin Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: New York Posts: 10,271	Wrapping up this thread sidetrack with a bow, Donald Trump, born in 1946, actually is a boomer.
	__________________ My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

1st November 2020, 05:49 AM	#100
Mader Levap Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 1,576	Originally Posted by dirtywick Which is the point, how can a general relate to the average American or even understand what problems they face? They’ve never been out of their bubble. In this case, probably no POTUS ever qualified. Politicians and billionaries live in their own bubbles.
	__________________ Sanity is overrated. / Voting for Republicans is morally equivalent to voting for Nazis in early 30's.

1st November 2020, 02:29 PM	#101
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,358	Originally Posted by Mader Levap In this case, probably no POTUS ever qualified. Politicians and billionaries live in their own bubbles. I’m not going to defend billionaire presidents. Especially those who are born into it. Their life experience isn’t in the same universe as ours. Certainly a good example of how people who live in a bubble govern poorly. Maybe we shouldn’t elect those. But I do think politician is the best background for a politician.
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,358

1st November 2020, 02:39 PM	#102
Mader Levap Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 1,576	Originally Posted by dirtywick But I do think politician is the best background for a politician. Politicians are best for politician job, sure, but that does not change fact they have their own bubble.
	__________________ Sanity is overrated. / Voting for Republicans is morally equivalent to voting for Nazis in early 30's.

1st November 2020, 02:45 PM	#103
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,358	Originally Posted by Mader Levap Politicians are best for politician job, sure, but that does not change fact they have their own bubble. I don’t think that’s true until the highest levels of government. Most build their careers at a local level for years.
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,358

1st November 2020, 03:09 PM	#104
Bob001 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: US of A Posts: 13,057	Originally Posted by dirtywick I’m not going to defend billionaire presidents. Especially those who are born into it. Their life experience isn’t in the same universe as ours. Certainly a good example of how people who live in a bubble govern poorly. Maybe we shouldn’t elect those. .... Presidents are not typically from rich families. Obama, Bill Clinton, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson and farther back were working/lower-middle class at best. Nixon was bitter all his life that he was admitted to Harvard but couldn't afford to go. LBJ worked construction to get through teachers college. They are characterized by a burning ambition to get ahead. The Bushes were tasteful old money, but far from billionaires, and they also held public service positions for generations. Part of Trump's con is that he is a billionaire (questionable), and that a "successful" businessman, which he is not, could run government as well. Even real billionaires like Jeff Bezos and Michael Bloomberg earned their money; they weren't born into it.

1st November 2020, 03:12 PM	#105
Foggy of the Fogbow Thinker Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 147	Trump was such a successful businessman he went bankrupt running a casino. People think that's easy to do, but IT'S NOT EASY.
	__________________ I hope y'all are still wearing your seatbelts, because this ride ain't over yet!

1st November 2020, 03:17 PM	#106
Safe-Keeper Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Norway Posts: 10,396	To be honest, I don't care. As long as Biden wins, he can sit as president for two months and then let Harris take over for all I care. Give the USA its first female president, to boot. Granted, she is a person of colour who doesn't fit neatly into a box as she's got dark skin, but isn't African-American, instead hailing from Indian and Jamaican descent, and the trumpkins have already shown that this frustrates them, so she might lead to more polarisation. But again, as long as Trump doesn't get four (or more) years, a honey badger could win the election for all I care.
	__________________ "He's like a drunk being given a sobriety test by the police after being pulled over. Just as a drunk can't walk a straight line, Trump can't think in a straight line. He's all over the place."--Stacyhs "If you are still hung up on that whole words-have-meaning thing, then 2020 is going to be a long year for you." --Ladewig

1st November 2020, 03:24 PM	#107
Bob001 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: US of A Posts: 13,057	Originally Posted by dirtywick ... Sorry to insult you. I’m a veteran if that makes you feel any better. It’s not that they’re not patriots or principled, it’s that they live in a separate world. They don’t understand what average Americans have to deal with in life because they’re not living the same way. Which is the point, how can a general relate to the average American or even understand what problems they face? They’ve never been out of their bubble. Can't find a link, but I recall that when Gen. Petraeus took over the CIA, he offended some people by expecting his subordinates to serve him like junior troops did when he was a four-star general. Military experience doesn't always translate to a civilian job.

1st November 2020, 03:26 PM	#108
Bob001 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: US of A Posts: 13,057	Originally Posted by Foggy of the Fogbow Trump was such a successful businessman he went bankrupt running a casino. People think that's easy to do, but IT'S NOT EASY. His biggest mistake was that he was running FOUR casinos. They were taking business from each other in a finite market. If he had focused on one he would have cleaned up.

1st November 2020, 03:34 PM	#109
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,597	Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper To be honest, I don't care. As long as Biden wins, he can sit as president for two months and then let Harris take over for all I care. Give the USA its first female president, to boot. Granted, she is a person of colour who doesn't fit neatly into a box as she's got dark skin, but isn't African-American, instead hailing from Indian and Jamaican descent, and the trumpkins have already shown that this frustrates them, so she might lead to more polarisation. But again, as long as Trump doesn't get four (or more) years, a honey badger could win the election for all I care. Where do you think the people of color in Jamaica came from? Her ancestors may not have been enslaved in Africa and sold to plantation owners in Georgia but is there really reason to deny that her heritage is similar?
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

1st November 2020, 03:36 PM	#110
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,597	Originally Posted by Bob001 His biggest mistake was that he was running FOUR casinos. They were taking business from each other in a finite market. If he had focused on one he would have cleaned up. No, his biggest mistake was taking out shirt term financing of 18 to 20 percent.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

1st November 2020, 03:41 PM	#111
Foggy of the Fogbow Thinker Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 147	Originally Posted by Bob001 His biggest mistake was that he was running FOUR casinos. They were taking business from each other in a finite market. If he had focused on one he would have cleaned up. And he had totally unqualified people from his family in key positions, people who had no idea how the casino business works. I heard he had a really good university, though. Until he had to pay $25 million because it was a fraud.
	__________________ I hope y'all are still wearing your seatbelts, because this ride ain't over yet!

1st November 2020, 03:54 PM	#112
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 18,246	Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper To be honest, I don't care. As long as Biden wins, he can sit as president for two months and then let Harris take over for all I care. Give the USA its first female president, to boot. Granted, she is a person of colour who doesn't fit neatly into a box as she's got dark skin, but isn't African-American, instead hailing from Indian and Jamaican descent, and the trumpkins have already shown that this frustrates them, so she might lead to more polarisation. But again, as long as Trump doesn't get four (or more) years, a honey badger could win the election for all I care. Honey badger don't care.

1st November 2020, 04:17 PM	#113
KDLarsen Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 4,402	I could've sworn I read somewhere that Biden had committed to a single term, to clean up trump's mess before leaving the stage for someone younger and - perhaps - more progressive, but I may have confused it with Pelosi promising this term would be her last in exchange for becoming speaker once again. I suspect Biden is well aware that just as people were voting against Clinton in 2016, a lot of his votes this time around will be from people voting against trump. Depending on who the republicans pick in 2024, he would face a much steeper challenge then, at age 80+ he'd probably feel he was too old for such a fight. Originally Posted by angrysoba Huh? You can be older than your uncle. How does it work then? I like to weird people out by pointing out my half-uncle is only 2 months older than me (my grandfather divorced my grandmother and married his secretary, my half-uncle was the result of that union)
KDLarsen Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 4,402

1st November 2020, 04:25 PM	#114
crescent Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Colorado Posts: 4,028	Originally Posted by KDLarsen I could've sworn I read somewhere that Biden had committed to a single term, That's going around the net for almost a year now but there's never been any confirmation of it. He's never limited himself to a single term, not publicly at least. Biden denies speculation of a one-term pledge The current disinformation campaign seems to be trying to get the story going again, you're not the first person I've seen mention it in the past few days. It's tied to the Trump's campaign strategy of getting people to think that Biden is too old and possibly senile.
	Last edited by crescent; 1st November 2020 at 04:30 PM.

1st November 2020, 05:42 PM	#115
Delvo Дэлво Δελϝο דֶלְבֹֿ देल्वो Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: North Tonawanda, NY Posts: 9,367	He never committed one way or the other. But if he runs for re-election against somebody who isn't Trump, he'll lose. That's why I'm more interested in Harris for 2024. Apparently she was rather progressive in the Senate, which I didn't believe at first because she sounds so conservative now. So why the reversal, and is it rereversible?

2nd November 2020, 06:45 AM	#116
Distracted1 Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 5,626	Originally Posted by Brainster IMHO it is a foregone conclusion that Trump is out January 20th and Biden is in. But for how long? The entire Democratic establishment must be relieved that covid has turned this into a virtual campaign, where Biden's appearances can be more easily monitored and where he doesn't get into the rhetorical weeds. But afterwards, when it turns time to govern? Pelosi has suddenly been talking about the 25th Amendment: It seems to me more likely that she's greasing the skids for Biden's likely removal at some point after the election. Obviously I have no real way of telling how much compos Biden has over his mentis. My dad was fine at that age, but you didn't want him driving after late afternoon or anytime he might be tired. Keep in mind, that Biden will be older on inauguration day than Reagan was the day he left the White House. BTW, I'm not trying to be snide with the grease the skids comment, or conspiracy minded. It does seem quite reasonable to ask the questions about this. I was more thinking that Pelosi's sudden renewed urgency on this matter indicates that maybe Biden's mental state is deteriorating. Biden has a solitary task to complete before he goes to his reward: Win the election. After that, I suspect the state of the nation will be such that he is incapacitated or dead within a few months. President Harris will inherit the odious task of captaining the Titanic after the iceburg has already been struck.
	__________________ The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.