Monthly Archives: July 2022

Hidin’ Biden should be primaried if he refuses to step aside for 2024

Getty Images news photo

California Gov. Gavin Newsom appears at a middle school in October. A presidential candidate like Newsom in 2024 would energize the Democratic Party base, including younger voters. In any event, President Joe Biden should not run for re-election, but if he does, he should be primaried, because much, much more is at stake than one man’s ego or feelings (or the egos or feelings of Democratic Party hacks, who would lead us even further down the road to ruin only to please themselves and their hackish sensibilities).

Things aren’t looking great for Uncle Joe.

His average approval rating, per fivethirtyeight.com, right now is at only 38.5 percent. (For a long time his approval rating languished somewhere in the low 40s, but for the past month or so, he’s been in the upper 30s.)

Fivethirtyeight.com notes that President Joe Biden’s current approval rating “is now the worst of any elected president at this point in his presidency since the end of World War II.”

So it comes as no shock that earlier this week The New York Times reported:

President Biden is facing an alarming level of doubt from inside his own party, with 64 percent of Democratic voters saying they would prefer a new standard-bearer in the 2024 presidential campaign, according to a New York Times/Siena College poll, as voters nationwide have soured on his leadership, giving him a meager 33 percent job-approval rating.

Widespread concerns about the economy and inflation have helped turn the national mood decidedly dark, both on Mr. Biden and the trajectory of the nation. More than three-quarters of registered voters see the United States moving in the wrong direction, a pervasive sense of pessimism that spans every corner of the country, every age range and racial group, cities, suburbs and rural areas, as well as both political parties.

Only 13 percent of American voters said the nation was on the right track — the lowest point in Times polling since the depths of the financial crisis more than a decade ago.

For Mr. Biden, that bleak national outlook has pushed his job approval rating to a perilously low point. Republican opposition is predictably overwhelming, but more than two-thirds of independents also now disapprove of the president’s performance, and nearly half disapprove strongly. Among fellow Democrats his approval rating stands at 70 percent, a relatively low figure for a president, especially heading into the 2022 midterms when Mr. Biden needs to rally Democrats to the polls to maintain control of Congress.

In a sign of deep vulnerability and of unease among what is supposed to be his political base, only 26 percent of Democratic voters said the party should re-nominate him in 2024. [Emphasis mine.]

Mr. Biden has said repeatedly that he intends to run for re-election in 2024. At 79, he is already the oldest president in American history, and concerns about his age ranked at the top of the list for Democratic voters who want the party to find an alternative.

The backlash against Mr. Biden and desire to move in a new direction were particularly acute among younger voters. In the survey, 94 percent of Democrats under the age of 30 said they would prefer a different presidential nominee. …

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Biden’s age in and of itself isn’t the problem. The problem is that Biden correctly and fairly could be called Sleepy Joe, as the treasonous, felonious former “President” Pussygrabber (who always was more like a fucking mob boss than anything remotely like a U.S. president) called him. (My own nickname for Biden was “Hidin’ Biden,” since he apparently hid out from the voters during his 2020 presidential “campaign,” and continues to do so as president. How a candidate campaigns usually is a great indicator as to how he or she actually would operate in office.)

Not only does Biden frequently appear to be addled, but he and his administration seem to be quite out to lunch while the world burns down to the ground all around them.

Biden is, I surmise, stuck in the glory days of his past — he was in the U.S. Senate from 1973 to 2009 and then was vice president from 2009 to 2017. From 1973 to 2017 — for 44 fucking years — he was in the Senate and then was veep, practically ensuring that he would be out of touch with the average American.

I knew that Biden was a shitty choice for the 2020 Democratic presidential nominee, and I said so at the time. And I did not vote for him, either. (I lived in California in November 2020, and there was no question that Biden was going to win the state and thus all of its electoral votes, so by not voting for him [if memory serves, I cast a protest vote for the Green Party presidential candidate instead], I did not help Pussygrabber at all.)

Now that Sleepy Joe’s approval ratings are at their lowest ever, and now that apparently only about a quarter of even Democrats believe that he should be the 2024 Democratic presidential candidate — you’d avoid a Jimmy Carter 2.0 if you could, wouldn’t you, if you were sane? — chatter increasingly is turning to who should replace Biden on the 2024 ballot.

Let me tell you who I wouldn’t support, right out of the gate: Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg or Amy Klobuchar, all of whom ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020.

All three of them did their best to tank Bernie Sanders’ candidacy to boost the moribund candidacy of Biden (Buttigieg, who only had been a small-city mayor, got a Cabinet post out of it), and I am unforgetting and unforgiving.

Buttigieg and Klobuchar always have been milquetoast, centrist corporate whores in the vein of Billary Clinton and Barack Obama, but Warren probably is even worse than they are: for her own selfish political gain she tried her best to torpedo the candidate who could have been our most progressive president in decades by employing “woke” bullshit, falsely accusing Bernie of being sexist. (Since that day, Warren has been dead to me. I’ll never give her another penny or a vote. Ever.)

To many misguided Democrats, Vice President Kamala Harris would look like the obvious replacement for Biden should he not run for 2024, but Harris was so unpopular even with the Democratic Party voters that she dropped out of the 2020 Democratic presidential race even before the first state, Iowa, caucused or voted — and further, her average approval rating right now, per fivethirtyeight.com, is only 37.1 percent, even lower than Hidin’ Biden’s.

If the idea would be to front a Democratic presidential candidate who could actually win in 2024 (rather than, in this case, to just check some “woke” boxes to make some “woke” people even more self-satisfied than they already are), it would not be Kamala Harris.

Who, then?

I reject all of the 2020 also-rans, with the exception, of course, of Bernie Sanders. Bernie runs circles around Biden cognitively — again, to me, cognitive function is more important than is age alone.

That said, I’d be surprised if Bernie were to run again. If he does, I’ll support him, as long as he’s still sharp enough, but I don’t expect him to run, because he’s 80 now and will turn 81 in September — and many if not most now are saying that Biden, at age 79 (he’ll be 80 in November), is too old. (Again, though, I think it’s that Biden’s cognitive issues mistakenly are being conflated with an “issue” of him being “too old.”)

So if not Bernie, who?

Frankly, ever since the Obama years, in which Obama was like the sun and there were no other astronomical bodies in the political solar system, the Democratic bench has been rather shallow.

Preliminarily, anyway, I’m thinking that current Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom has a good shot at the presidency, if he wants it (there is chatter that he does, and his recent messaging on the national stage certainly indicates that he does).

Newsom can appeal to the more youthful voters whom Sleepy Joe already has lost, and having been governor of the nation’s most populous state certainly would be great preparation for the Oval Office. (California has a population of about 39.2 million — about 10 more million people than the next-most-populous state, Texas, which has about 29.5 million.)

As a presidential candidate Newsom inevitably would be called a “socialist” — but any Democratic presidential candidate would be, since “socialist” is one of only a few words that the mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging, Pussygrabber-voting troglodytes even know (not that they even fucking know the actual definition of the word, but they can — and do — blindly repeat it ad nauseam) — but Newsom has not actually governed as some woo-woo kook, but has governed pragmatically.

And Newsom is popular in California; he won his first gubernatorial election in November 2018 with 61.9 percent of the vote — and he garnered 61.9 percent again in the bullshit, Repugnican-orchestrated gubernatorial recall election of September 2021, so obviously there was no love for Newsom lost among the majority of California’s voters, as the bat-shit loony recall-election proponents had alleged there was. (They’d really hoped that they could leverage COVID-19’s effects on the Golden State to be successful in a do-over election for governor. There is no public crisis that the fascists won’t try to leverage to gain power for themselves.)

I’d prefer a younger version of a Bernie Sanders to be Biden’s successor, but if no such candidate emerges, and if Bernie doesn’t run again, then Newsom would do.

I wish that more names came to mind, but, again, since Obama, the Democratic bench has been shallow.

I’d personally be OK with someone like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, but at 32, she’s awfully young and could use more political experience under her belt before running for the presidency, I think. (You have to be 35 years old to be U.S. president, and Ocasio-Cortez won’t be 35 until October 2024, meaning that if elected president in 2024 [that won’t happen, of course], at her inauguration she’d be 35.)

Marianne Williamson is a guilty pleasure of mine — I like her, even though she talks about prayer and I’m an atheist; she seems to be rooted in progressive (that is, actual) Christianity, which is rare these days — and we are woefully overdue for our first female president, but I don’t see Williamson winning a Democratic presidential nomination. (I could support her, though, if she should run again and this time miraculously surge in popular support.)

It’s blatantly clear that given his appallingly low support even among those of his party, Joe Biden absolutely should not run for re-election, and I’m now at the point where I believe that even if Biden runs again, he should be primaried (that’s a verb now…).

No, I don’t expect Biden to make himself even more than a lame duck than he already is (I don’t think that anyone in D.C. is politically afraid of the doddering old man), so I don’t posit that Biden should announce ASAP that he’s not running again, but for the good of the nation, I think that he should announce no later than sometime next year that he will step down after one term.

If Biden wants to avoid the awkwardness of being primaried in 2024, he can do the right thing and hang it up when he should.

But, again, if Sleepy Joe refuses to hang it up, he should be primaried nonetheless, for the good of the nation.

Let the peoplenot the Democratic Party hacks, such as those who got Hidin’ Biden into the Oval Office despite his glaring deficiencies in the first place — decide who should represent us in the 2024 presidential election.

P.S. Bernie Sanders has said that if Biden runs for a second term, then he will not run in 2024, but that he has not ruled out running again in 2024 if Biden does not run.

It is well worth it for us to think of who we’d like to see replace Biden in 2024 as the Democratic Party presidential candidate, even if Biden refuses to decline to run in 2024 — and even if that candidate would be roundly attacked by the self-serving Democratic Party hacks for having dared to challenge Biden for the presidency. (Again: Let. The. People. Decide.)

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Fugitive Uterus Act of 2022

The Repugnican idea that a red state may own a woman’s or a girl’s uterus — that it is the property of the red state — is a recipe for the next American civil war.

The Repugnicans of today are like the basement-dwelling, animal-skin-wearing incels who attacked the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2001: They want the momentary thrill of making the political attack, but clearly, they have no fucking plan for the aftermath of the attack.

Repugnican chatter about prosecuting women (and girls) who travel to a state where abortion is legal in order to obtain an abortion is, like so much of the rest of the Repugnican platform, unconscionable, and, if carried out, would be disastrous.

The long-standing legal rule is that if you commit an act in a state where that act is not a crime, then you have not committed a crime. If you live in a state where recreational marijuana use is illegal, for instance, but you find yourself in an enlightened state where recreational marijuana use is legal, and you partake in it, you have not committed a crime.

What the Repugnicans essentially are saying is that in a backasswards state where abortion is illegal, the state owns every female resident’s uterus; her uterus, clearly, is the property of the state — wherever she goes.

Speaking of human property, the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 was one of the elements that ultimately led to the first U.S. Civil War (yes, I anticipate a second one). Wikipedia notes:

The Fugitive Slave Act or Fugitive Slave Law was passed by the United States Congress on September 18, 1850, as part of the Compromise of 1850 between Southern interests in slavery and Northern Free-Soilers.

The Act was one of the most controversial elements of the 1850 compromise and heightened Northern fears of a slave power conspiracy. It required that all escaped slaves, upon capture, be returned to the slaver and that officials and citizens of free states had to cooperate. Abolitionists nicknamed it the “Bloodhound Bill,” after the dogs that were used to track down people fleeing from slavery.

The Act contributed to the growing polarization of the country over the issue of slavery, and was one of the factors that led to the Civil War.

If memory serves, I first made the real connection between the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 and the Repugnican plan to prosecute (and persecute) females who live in a state where abortion is illegal but who obtain an abortion in a state where it is legal when I read a July 2 column by The New York Time’s Jamelle Bouie in which he noted: “The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 did not require Northern states to condone slavery, but it did force them to assist in apprehending escaped slaves.”

Later in his column, Bouie notes, “In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, overturning Roe v. Wade, Republican lawmakers have introduced bills that try to curb abortion with limits on the right of travel between states.”

I was a little surprised that in his column Bouie didn’t make a more direct and immediate connection between the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 and the Repugnican plan to assert a red state’s authority over what happens in another (most likely blue) state (in regards to abortion in this case, I mean, of course), and it’s not literally that the Repugnican plan is to disallow a female to travel to another state for an abortion, but that it is to prosecute her should she do so and should the red state find out about it.

(With the long-standing right to privacy, including medical privacy, I’m not sure how that would work and still be within bounds of the U.S. Constitution, but, of course, it’s a bunch of illegitimate, unelected theofascists on the U.S. Supreme Court who now are deciding for all of us what the Constitution means and doesn’t mean — at least until we, the people, finally check their brazen abuse of power).

Still, Bouie’s column is valuable and I recommend that you read it.

The Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson, in his column of July 4, made the more direct and immediate connection that I found lacking in Bouie’s July 2 column. Robinson wrote:

One of the milestones on the downward spiral toward the Civil War was the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, which required that [enslaved] African Americans who managed to flee to free states be returned to bondage. It is shocking, and depressing, that Republicans would even think of raising a similar question today: What about women who reside in a state where abortion is banned and who cross state lines to have their pregnancies safely and legally terminated?

Can they be prohibited from traveling? Prosecuted upon their return? And what about the doctors who perform the abortions? Can a physician in one of Minnesota’s abortion clinics, which expect a rush of out-of-state patients, be arrested upon setting foot across the border in South Dakota, where ambitious GOP Gov. Kristi L. Noem has doubts about an abortion-ban exception even for a 10-year-old victim of rape?

Speaking of 10-year-old girls, there is the news story of the 10-year-old girl in Ohio who had to go to Indiana for an abortion because she’d become pregnant after having been raped and because Ohio is one of the backasswards states that essentially has outlawed abortion, now that the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed it to.

Like I said: The mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging Repugnicans have no fucking plan for what comes next. They just wanted to own the libs by reversing Roe vs. Wade. Stories like that of the raped and impregnated 10-year-old girl from Ohio are going to proliferate shortly, exposing the Repugnicans’ hypocrisy, insanity and cruelty even further.

It’s one thing for the troglodytes of the red states to perpetrate their evils and wrongs within their own borders; it’s an altogether other thing for them to attempt to spread their evil insanity into the saner, freer states.

In the meantime, there perhaps is no better recipe for a second U.S. Civil War than red-state thugs and goons thinking that they can interfere with activity in the free, blue or purple states that is perfectly legal.

Our patriots’ message to the treasonous theofascists who control the Repugnican Party today must be this: Fuck around and find out, bitches — like you did the first time, in the 1860s.

Maybe this time we’ll finish the job, as we should have done the last time.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized