It obviously matters a great deal who the opponent is. If it was Eisenhower and a Dem had proven misconduct that was significant then yeah we'll go with another Dem. But it's Trump and that's all that matters. You think some ethical issue is germane when there is a guy running who could get rid of democracy, rule indefinitely, where are rights are at his whim? Please. The only thing that matters now is putting the guy against Trump who has the best chance of beating him. That's it. Everything thing else is secondary.

So much for open discussion.

Are you able to tell me if a presidential candidate should have articulatable scandals consisting of

articuable? "capable of being expressed, explained, or justified."?

For something to be articulable does it need to have solid evidence to back up the "explanation?"

Just as much as the Wuhan lab, I guess. Not proven, just enough to warrant open discussion.

Apparently that is NOT open for discussion in either case. (Wuhan lab, or Biden scandals)

Who says you can't give your opinion on this? I'm just giving mine. And obviously you're free to express yourself and try to convince other people. If Trump is elected, however--and I am being serious--that will no longer be the case...

"Rockin' in The Free World"--the basic understanding that no matter what the defects of the US listed in the song we're still free to express ourselves would no longer be true...

For me, that's why the talk of Biden's alleged peccadilloes (which as I discussed above there is weak evidence for unlike say the corruption of Alito or Thomas) are not very interesting at the moment...given the stakes involved here with a Trump presidency.

You're apparently worried that Biden might have allowed himself to be used by his son to give the appearance of influence to convince investors that they should pay Hunter Biden money...I'm worried about our fundamental freedoms in a free country.

Those two things are on massively different scales of comparison (comparing apples to oranges but on an exponential scale), at least to me.

I also gave my opinion. Your lack of response reminds me of Canadian propaganda.

I responded to all your contentions-I didn't avoid them. I carefully explained my reasoning. You just don't like my answers. Labeling them propaganda doesn't help your case...

I used the adjective "Canadian" to identify the same type of propaganda. The same type where someone continues to say the same thing, but is unable to answer the question.

Obviously, I understand the lack of desire in saying anything that could be construed as beneficial to Trump. We agree on that. I have said it before that I don't like Trump. However, saying anything that would identify you as having standards showing what you would not be willing to consider in a presidential candidate (regardless of Trump OR Biden) shows the lack of an answer.

I guess the only thing you stand for is someone who is not Trump. Quite the platform...

No need to continue. I was hopeful for more.

Agreed. Further discussion would not be productive.

Does the Left Wing of the electorate here on Redscape still think that a Biden ticket is the best chance for the Democrats to retain the White House? I cannot see how.

I will make a prediction. He either gets out by December 1st (the post Thanksgiving family career meeting), or the Democrats lose in 24.

Exciting stuff. What will happen if the primary process puts forth Biden, and the numbers are terrible. Does Biden pull our and a write-in for Newsome comes about? Does No Labels gain traction?

The polls from the 6 swing states must worry some.

With Manchin not running (he was dead man walking), he stated he is not going to run. Manchin, however, did say:

I will finish my term while traveling the country and speaking out to see if there is interest in building a movement to mobilize the middle, find common ground and bring Americans together.

My question is do you want Manchin more than Biden or Trump? For me, I would.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-i-wont-be-seeking-re-election-to-the-senate-politics-washington-joe-manchin-7f61ee21?mod=opinion_lead_pos5

Biden is Trump's Kryptonite. He won't beat him. Running anyone else would not be a wise gamble. As for polling Republicans are winning polls...Democrats are winning races. The same will hold true for Biden. Trump is going to get the worst thrashing ever in a presidential election in the popular vote (not electoral vote because of polarization) if he isn't in jail...

Trump is the worst, most unpatriotic person ever to run for political office. I hope he takes down the Republican Party when he gets utterly rejected by the American people who may not agree on much but I think they agree on they would like to keep America a democracy. Also think that any party that insists on completely getting rid of aborton rights has no future. That's becoming clearer and clearer.

I find the whole idea that we have to get a centrist to beat Trump is questionable. Moderate people--majority of Americans--would take Trump over Biden and allow Trump to continue to trash our institutions that probably will not ever recover from a second Trump because he is a little too left for them or they think he's too old? I can't see it. That makes no sense to me.

Anyway, if youre right-wing and think Biden is going to withdraw it ain't going to happen. He's going to win. Again.

bbauska wrote:
My question is do you want Manchin more than Biden or Trump? For me, I would.

Yep, me too. I'd take anyone from Bernie Sanders to Mitt Romney over either. But if Biden wins he's not going to wreck the democracy, so he's got that going for him over the orange guy.

“Right now, looking at the polling, it’s not No Labels that’s going to re-elect Donald Trump. Right now, it looks like it’s Joe Biden who’s going to re-elect Donald Trump.”

— Former Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), in an interview with the Wall Street Journal.

"While a third-party candidate can’t win, No Labels could still throw the election to Trump, and it wouldn’t take that many votes. Let’s look at three battleground states: Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. In 2016, Trump’s margin of victory was less than 50,000 votes in these states, and third parties won significantly more votes than that in each one. "

"A No Labels candidate in these states could easily hand the election to Trump. But maybe that’s the goal. Whatever their original intentions, the people behind No Labels — including Harlan Crow, the GOP mega-donor who gifted travel and luxury vacations to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas — are using dark money on this folly. The group is working to raise $70 million and has already qualified for the ballot in 12 states..."

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ ... s-00132066

"Then there’s Ross Perot, who No Labels aspires to emulate for his appeal to “ the vast middle of the electorate.” Despite unlimited cash and facing an unpopular incumbent in George H.W. Bush and a near-unknown in Bill Clinton, Perot failed to win a single state."

"Look at the last half-century of election results. In modern U.S. presidential history, third parties have not won much. In 1968, George Wallace won 46 electoral votes by running a regionally-targeted (and racist) campaign. Since then, they’ve won zilch — not a single state"


"The Wall Street Journal did an analysis that showed third parties would more likely draw votes from Biden. The report points to an NBC survey that has Biden and Trump tied head to head, but if you add a third-party candidate, Trump leads by 3 percent. (Of course, this math might change if Liz Cheney or RFK Jr. make a serious run.) New polling of young voters shows a similar dynamic, shrinking Biden’s lead with the introduction of third parties."

Third parties help one side or the other. Harlan Braun ain't supporting No Labels because he thinks it helps Biden. No Labels is either deluded (or much more likely) consciously trying to sway the election for Trump. That's the reality. I'm not worried about Biden losing to Trump straight up but a well-funded third party taking votes from Trump might give him a chance.

I really don't know why you think a compromise third-party is a good thing, Brad. They have zero chance of winning so it really comes who do they take more votes from. Given their secrecy about funding I think their likely intent is to help Trump but even if that isn't their intent that will be the likely effect. I mean, if you were uncertain about the effect--whether it would help Trump or Biden--the risk that it would help Trump is more of a concern. Trump needs/wants chaos to have a chance to win...