Did Biden contact any of the repub senators to try to talk reason with them about this momentously

[JudyM]

important vote? Has anyone seen anything about that happening?

Just curious, I hadn’t heard anything about him trying to help with his connections. I am curious about whether he will realistically be able to corral any of them if he is elected. That would be a ray of hope. But things seem to have gotten too far out of hand for that.

If he has that ability, it’s an important differentiator.

[PatSeg]

1. I fear that it is too late for republicans

in congress. I don't think anyone can get through to them, even republicans who have retired like John Warner. It looks like they've decided to go down with the ship.

I don't see how the republican party can survive. They barely resemble the party they were not so long ago. They no longer stand for anything of substance. Of course, a lot of what they stood for in the past was a political mirage, but now they don't even have that anymore.

[JudyM]

8. Half of the population seems to be voting in their sleep.

[PatSeg]

13. So many of them

really aren't paying that much attention, probably relying on Facebook memes and an occasional ad on television.

[Scurrilous]

2. Bernie is the one who claims to be able to reason with Republicans.

2016 - NY Daily News

During his interview and elsewhere on the trail, Sanders has been beaten up for not specifying how he will pass his agenda through Congress, which observers astutely note is controlled by Republicans rather than democratic socialists.

The answer that Sanders gives —

1. Republicans suddenly agree to pass his agenda.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-daily-news_n_5704779ce4b0a506064d8df5

Someone wake him up and get him on it. He can do miracles...

[JudyM]

4. I'm asking about Biden.

[Scurrilous]

14. Did you try contacting his campaign?

[OilemFirchen]

17. Sanders is a Senator at present.

He even participated in the impeachment trial.

Did you somehow miss this?

[JudyM]

18. This is not about Sanders. It's about Biden. In case you missed that.

[emmaverybo]

3. Would that have been appropriate given that he and son were the targets of Trump's crime? His

attempting to influence the Senate hearing would be a very bad look, not helpful to us at all.

If you want to see his ability to wrest some tough votes out of Republicans, even to work with McConnell on behalf of Obama, under his direction, read up on his tenure as VP. He did help get McCain’s last vote, but an entirely different set of conditions.

If negotiations with congress have any chance of furthering some Dem agenda items, such as infrastructure and immigration reform, Biden has the skill and experience, thus the best chance of accomplishing anything within severe constraints, but he’s not a magician nor claims to be.

Best hope is that the nominee has positive effect on down-balloting and strong coat tails. Some of us believe Biden would.

[JudyM]

5. Urging a vote to allow witnesses wouldn't be a conflict of interest

because he wouldn’t personally gain from it.

I actually also question if it might’ve been good for our democracy for him to agree to testify. That’s what it might’ve taken to negotiate for the witnesses we wanted. As much of an offbeat distraction as that would’ve been, it would’ve presumably laid to rest the issue that will now continue to haunt the election about his/Hunter’s possible conflicts re:Ukraine. That may have been the best strategic move we had: we get our witnesses and clear Biden’s name. As it played out, we got neither benefit.

[BannonsLiver]

6. So now Biden is at fault for no witnesses

It’s getting quite ripe in here these days.

[JudyM]

7. Not at all. Just raising the possibility because that was what they kept asking for.

[emmaverybo]

16. It seems to be what you would have asked for too. My philosophy is that when my enemies

keep asking for something, it isn’t in my best interest to oblige them. Most likely a trap.

[emmaverybo]

15. Their being witnesses would not have debunked "possible conflicts of interest" as that has already

been as debunked as it ever can be. Only have stirred up more innuendo, disinformation, smears and left an impression that the targets of Trump’s crime are of a piece with the impeachment subject—Trump. This would have been the worst concession. No way would such a move clear Biden and son, but rather imply guilt that in turn would add to the whataboutism used to try to retroactively impeach Obama.

What a can of worms that would be. I doubt the majority of House Dems wanted Biden to testify, be subject to bullying cross-examination—furnishing tweet-worthy snippets, taken out of context and implying guilt, thus undoing the official record which shows Biden and son free of corrupt motive or act.

Biden’s testimony could only muddy the waters. He did not witness Trump’s crime. He is not material to impeachment proceedings. Putting Biden and his son on trial along with Trump is a Republican dream come true.

[JudyM]

21. It was not material, right, but it's what the repubs kept clamoring for. Schiff wisely suggested

limiting the witness testimony to 1 week. That didn’t fly but maybe if we offered to have Biden testify they would’ve taken their chances. It looks like we’re hiding something, IMO, playing right into their story.

But if Biden testified the House managers could’ve dealt with the issues as they did in their presentations and question responses. To the extent the water is muddy about Biden now, it wouldn’t be worse if the truth of non-conflict of interest has light shined on it, exactly the opposite. That’s all they’re going to continue to talk about since we didn’t have him testify. No opportunity to fight the allegations.

[lapucelle]

24. The water isn't muddy about Biden, and had witnesses been allowed,

the Republicans could have called whomever they wanted.

Who is the apocryphal anonymous "we" who would have had to offer up Joe Biden?

Why would you say that the waters are muddy about Joe Biden after the Republicans conceded that the Democrats had proven their case, a part of which was that Biden has done nothing wrong?

[JudyM]

25. You think the water isn't muddy, the DUer I was responding to said it is.

I’m assuming he didn’t do anything wrong, and if so it would’ve cut off st the knees their attempts to tar him with it in the election, if he’s our candidate.

All references to “we” and “our” always refer to Dems of course.

[lapucelle]

31. The DU poster didn't say the waters are muddy about Joe Biden. You said it.

*******************************************************************************************

[JudyM]

33. Ok you are correct, and if you think the water is not at all muddy to some extent then I don't know.

What I said:

To the extent the water is muddy about Biden now, it wouldn’t be worse if the truth of non-conflict of interest has light shined on it, exactly the opposite.

If being perfectly honest, you don’t think the public is wondering what all the fuss is about the Biden/Burisma issue, we have a difference of opinion. What I’ve witnessed is a lot of confusion. Not everyone watches Rachel, most certainly not the voters we most need to reach. It does us no good to pretend this issue will go away. It seems to be their key criticism of Joe, and if he is our candidate this has to get cleared up better than it currently is. The impeachment trial would’ve been a good, centralized venue for that, just my thought. Now it may have played into their hand that we refused to address it.

Again, it’s immaterial to the impeachment, no question there, it’s just a question of strategy.

[emmaverybo]

26. See#8. Glad Biden did not offer himself up as a hostage to their political games. Nothing would

satisfy them. I want a leader who understands that. And the difference between when we can get something we need from them that might be worth concession and when concession just leads to more and ensnare us.

[JudyM]

27. Schiff would've been perfectly capable of managing this.

[emmaverybo]

28. Your initial question should have alerted me that you wanted to blame Biden in someway somehow

for a failure here. Sorry, Judy. I am not playing. I get what you believe and I disagree.

[JudyM]

30. You clearly don't get it at all,

Biden is not my first choice but I’ll work hard to GOTV for him if he’s our candidate. I am interested in finding out whether he may have been working behind the scenes to help with the awful dilemma we are all in... and if he didn’t, whether it could’ve helped if he did. If you don’t think these are fair questions, so be it. This is a discussion board and shying away from discussing hard questions doesn’t help us. We need more light shining, not less.

[floppyboo]

36. emmaverybo - NO! That's the GOP's defense: Ends justify the means! Anarchy!

Joe made a big mistake when he said he wouldn't honor a subpoena, and if he had any trust in his soon to be team, he would have marched in there, listened to the questions, and then have his council declare "non-material". I think he has really damaged his boastful 'beat you like a drum' meme. He looks weak. He makes the whole party look weak.
Yes it could have dragged the whole thing out.
Maybe Tulsi was right - censure.

[Uncle Joe]

9. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread JudyM.

[highplainsdem]

10. Bizarre question. Biden's too smart to do anything that both Republican senators and the House

impeachment managers would criticize him for.

Any attempt to do so would be denounced by the GOP as "Senate jury tampering."

[JudyM]

11. Not really. Extending the fact finding wouldn't benefit him.

It would’ve benefited the Dem party, IMO.

[Retrograde]

12. Biden's not in the Senate

and hasn't been for over a decade, i.e., before the rise of McConnell.

[Politicub]

20. It would have been a great time to bend them to his will

by using his intoxicating essence.

[Dietz]

22. Dismal record as a senator

I, too, am concerned about Bernie's dismal record as a senator. If he can't work with anybody who doesn't share his views, what will he get done as president? I like his visions, but I see him more as a public intellectual moving the social agenda forward in good ways. I fear he would be completely inefficient as a president, producing a backlash in the next election.

[JudyM]

23. This post is about Joe.

[texasfiddler]

29. Is Joe Biden a current Senator like Sanders?

[JudyM]

32. Completely irrelevant.

Joe has emphasized many times his ability to collaborate with repub senators as being one of his key strengths. I sure as hell would’ve been calling my friends on the other side of the aisle if I was adept at working with them... this “trial” was a super-critical moment in our constitutional history.

[gibraltar72]

34. Yes Joe

please point out the reasonable ones!