The essential issue - - - Joe Biden can WIN . . . . .

[Faryn Balyncd]

Can we afford to continue to 2008 with a standard bearer who increasing numbers of Americans believe to be unelectable?

One who simultaneously energizes the Republican base and demoralizes much of the Democratic base? One for whom unprecedented numbers of voters, including vital independent swing voters, claim they can never support?


- - - - - - - -


Can we afford to have our future actions regarding Iraq,Iran, and Pakistan, at least 2 Supreme Court justices, the status of "unitary executive" legal theory, and of our eroding civil liberties, determined by Rudolf Giuliani or Mitch Romney?


- - - - - - - -


Joe Biden has shown that he is not only right on the essential issues, but most of all, this experienced, time-tempered, and transparent candidate can WIN.

Biden can energize the correct base - OUR base, not the Republicans.

Biden can attract the independent (and even a few disaffected Republican) voters - with whom we won in 2006, and without whose support we threaten to turn over control of our nation for another 4-8 years to the Republican machine.

Yes, there are other candidates besides Joe Biden that could win in the general election, who would not energize the currently demoralized GOP base, and that could also win the independent vote.

But these campaigns remain fragmented and seem to be floundering.

If we are to win in 2008, we will do so only by coalescing around a winner.

I am coming to think Joe Biden may be that man.

[rubberducky]

1. I`m starting to believe he is truely a winner.

[independentpiney]

3. I've been undecided with a lean towards Edwards

But Biden is looking better and better to me. He seems to have consciously overcome the excess verbosity that I had always considered his main weak point as a speaker and potential candidate.

[jillan]

2. What is amazing - over at Biden's website - there are Republicans coming over as well.

There is one today that said that she is a very conservative Republican that is going to vote for Joe because she does not like any of the candidates on her side and that she is impressed with Biden's foreign policy experience and straight talk.

So there you go!

Joe Biden appeals to a wide variety of voters.

[ginchinchili]

8. Obviously one person can't speak for the entire lot, but her reasoning is hardly atypical.

I'm confident that there will be a lot of independents and moderate Republicans (and apparently a few conservative Republicans) who will find Joe Biden very appealing because of his depth of knowledge, he's a gutsy, stand up kind of guy, and he's got integrity, qualities that all people should find attractive.

[sampsonblk]

4. Same mistake we made in 2004 - voting for electability. nt

[Inuca]

5. We did NOT make a mistake in 04, and it would not be a mistake

to gather around Biden now. Both Kerry and Biden are experienced intelligent men. I will not go into the long list of their qualities and what would have made Kerry an outstanding president and what hopefully will make Biden one. The only point I want to make is that statements like yours are... well, just silly and infantile. They do not help in any way.

[Faryn Balyncd]

6. You have a point, Sampsonblk. . . . Electability alone is not enough . . . . . . . . Do you think

the current frontrunner is better on the critical issues than Biden?

(I like several of the other candidates very much, but time is running short.)

I fear that the current front-runner may well result in a Republican administration. And that even if we were to pull out a victory with a Clinton ticket, that the prospects for ending the occupation, avoiding war in Iran & elsewhere, and reversing the assaults of the GOP assault on civil liberties and democratic institutions would be problematic.

It looks to me that Biden is right on the essential issues of war, civil liberties & the rule of law, and that he is showing the leadership to become our nominee (where the other candidates I like are faltering), and a good president.

What do you think?

[Think82]

12. Agreed. Biden's the man.

He is WAAAAAYYYY better a candidate than Kerry. One does not fall asleep listening to Joe Biden. Could Kerry have delivered THIS SPEECH?!:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1op8vwF5UA

[gateley]

15. I never get tired of watching that video. I WANT a President who's absolutely

fed up with what has become of this country (like I am), who's willing to let people know he's pissed and intends to do something about it. I want someone who's PASSIONATE about our country. We see "presidents" like this in movies and think - I wish OUR president was like that. Well here's our man.

[jillan]

7. I love Kerry - both Kerry and Biden are foreign policy experts, they understand what is at stake.

and it was our country's loss - and the whole world's for that matter - when Kerry didn't end up in the Oval Office.

The difference between Kerry and Biden is that Kerry is more of a gentleman. He is more refined. More like a professor (all qualities that I greatly admire in all people)
while Biden is more like your average Joe. He speaks in plain language. He's not afraid to tell you what is on his mind...and yes that gets him in trouble. Look at what he just said about Rudy. In one sentence he attacked the heart of Rudy's campaign, and his weakness. Biden will not back down. Infact, the whole reason I started noticing Biden was in 2004 when I was so frustrated with what was going on with the swiftboatliars. C-Span had on a campaign event with Kerry. Biden was there. After the event, the cameras went to Biden where he was chewing out the reporters for lying about Kerry. I sat there cheering him on.
Biden is very electable!

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

9. Hey, Pirhana... have you seen this clip anywhere?:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3677310

[jillan]

10. No - but I will put a shout out to some Biden supporters that are more on top of his youtube clips

than I am.

[gateley]

16. I'd like to see that too. I'll help you look Pirhana. nt

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

20. It was in a senate hearing... since he seemed so in charge of things it was

probably foreign relations. I keep trying to remember who the anti-geneva convention witness was, but I'm drawing a blank.

He was arguing that his son in Iraq would prefer that the geneva conventions remain in place. (I hate that argumnet... the reason to not torture has nothing to do with whether our side gets tortured, and it's silly in the context of a guerrilla war where the other side is not a nation and has not signed anything at all)

But the controlled, focused rage was beautiful, and would doubtless be inspiring to many folks here. And it was striking hearing him mention a son in combat, and being protective of him.

[gateley]

22. I was just coming back to ask you for more info -- I'm slogging through

the vids now and keep getting waylaid, stopping to watch them all!

This will help me further narrow it down. Thanks!

[gateley]

23. PS -- did you see it live, like on C-Span, or was it an actual video you saw?

If a vid, any idea where you saw it?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

28. I saw it live on cspan, but it was a featured clip on a lot of the news shows that night (Harball, e

[gateley]

26. K&R - is this it?

It's really brief, so not sure if this is the one you were referring to. No mention of his son. Biden reminds me of Jack Nicholson.

I'm also enclosing a transcript.

Thanks to Matthew - an Bidenite from another blog for these links!



www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=121242&title=moment-of-zen-joe-bidens-lecture

Here's a full transcript of the hearing. It's from June 2004.

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25211-2004Jun8.html

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

29. What a fun transcript. Went ahead and posted it here for casual readers:

Senator Biden?

BIDEN: Thank you very much.

On my six minutes, can I yield 20 seconds to my colleague to follow up on a question?

KENNEDY: Just, General, has the president authorized you to invoke the executive privilege today on these documents?

ASHCROFT: I am not going to reveal discussions, whether I've had them or not had them, with the president. He asked me to deal with him as a matter of confidence.

I have not invoked executive privilege today. I have explained to you why I'm not turning over the documents.

KENNEDY: Well, what are you invoking?

ASHCROFT: I have not invoked anything. I have just explained to you why I'm not turning over the documents.

BIDEN: Thank you very much.

Well, General, that means you may be in contempt of Congress then. You got to have a reason not to answer our questions, as you know from you sitting up here. There may be a rationale for executive privilege that misses the point, but, you know, you have to have a reason. You are not allowed, under our Constitution, not to answer our questions, and that ain't constitutional.

But that's a different question. I don't want to get off on it, because I have to talk about other things. But you all better come up with a good rationale, because otherwise it's contempt of Congress.

One of the things that I'm a little confused about here is I don't know anybody in America who's argued we shouldn't attempt to preempt terrorist attacks. The question is, what are we allowed under our Constitution to do to preempt terrorist attacks? And that's really the issue here -- not whether we should preempt, or want to preempt, but what we're allowed to do to preempt.

BIDEN: Now, one of the questions I have -- and if you don't have an answer, I understand. If you could just let me know. So seldom we get to see it. You know, I mean, when you were on the committee, Janet Reno was up 12, 13 times, 22 times in her tenure. You've been up three times. We miss you, John. We'd like to see you more.

But at any rate, is there, to the best of your knowledge, a presidential order, not a secret -- a presidential order anywhere that immunizes interrogators of Al Qaida suspects? Is there any order that the president has issued that lets it be known that they're immunized, based on the tactics they use, from prosecution? Is there such an order, if you know?

ASHCROFT: The president has issued no such order.

BIDEN: OK, good. I just want to get the record straight.

Now, the other -- I have a couple more questions along these lines, if I may. Is it your position that in time of war, which we're in now, that Congress has no authority to question the legal judgments of the executive branch even if we think the administration may have violated a treaty or a law or the Constitution? If we think you violated a treaty, a law, a statute or the Constitution, is it your position that at a time of war that we, the Congress, don't have the authority to question you and get answers to those questions?

ASHCROFT: First of all, I think the Congress has the right to ask any question it wants. And has a responsibility -- its oversight responsibility, and to debate and to criticize where it chooses to, and commend where it chooses to and not say anything if it chooses to do that.

ASHCROFT: There are certain things, that in the interest of the executive branch operating effectively, that I believe it is inappropriate for the attorney general to say.

Some of those relate to things that he has said, perhaps in advice he has given, and some relate to hypotheticals that he might say or might not give. I think in terms of drawing that issue sharply, I thought Attorney General Murphy, who subsequently became a justice of the Supreme Court, said it very clearly.

BIDEN: But what he said was generic; he didn't say anything specific. I know what he said. He didn't say anything specific. He was generic.

ASHCROFT: No, sir. And I'm going to try and do the same.

BIDEN: Oh no, you're being very generic. I acknowledge that. You are as generic as they come.

(CROSSTALK)

BIDEN: No, I got it. This is generic. We're trying to get specific.

And you said that there's been no -- you're not going to give us the memoranda that were referenced here.

But let me ask you as a lawyer, as a lawyer with an advanced degree beyond law school, I'd like your legal opinion as attorney general: If in fact there was a memo that said that torture might be justified and would be constitutional if applied to interrogations, if such a memo existed, would that -- is that good law? Do you believe that to be the law?

You, the attorney general of the United States, two degrees from prestigious law schools and institutions...

ASHCROFT: I have two degrees. The third degree I get when I visit the Senate.

(LAUGHTER)

So I don't have a degree beyond law school, other than the ones that I'm accorded here.

BIDEN: I thought you had a master's as well in law.

ASHCROFT: Oh, I don't. But I am wishing I did at this time.

(LAUGHTER)

BIDEN: OK. All right. Where did you go to law school?

ASHCROFT: It wasn't under your tutelage. But maybe it should have been, because I know you teach.

BIDEN: No, I understand.

But do you think -- do you think that torture might be justified?

A question to you; not memorandum, just you, John Ashcroft, attorney general of the United States, highest-ranking law enforcement officer in the United States of America, and lawyer. Do you believe in this time of war, torture might be justified and be viewed as constitutional?

ASHCROFT: Well, first of all, this administration has not ordered or approved...

BIDEN: I'm not asking that, John. Excuse me, all due respect...

ASHCROFT: I am not going to issue...

BIDEN: I just want to know your opinion.

ASHCROFT: ... or otherwise discuss hypotheticals. I'll leave that to the academics. Just ask them the subject.

BIDEN: Do you think this is justified? It's not hypothetical.

ASHCROFT: That's not hypothetical. That's a circumstance. And that's the kind of circumstance that when it is referred to the Justice Department, we investigate. And if there is a basis for prosecution, we would prosecute. And we have...

BIDEN: John, you sound like you're in the State Department. Remember the old days when you were here looking for answers, remember on this side?

ASHCROFT: I have a recollection of that.

BIDEN: Well, my time's up, I can see.

ASHCROFT: You know, I condemn torture. I think it...

BIDEN: So it's not justified, then?

ASHCROFT: I don't think it's productive, let alone justified.

BIDEN: Well, I don't either.

And by the way, there's a reason -- I'll conclude by saying -- there's a reason why we sign these treaties: to protect my son in the military. That's why we have these treaties. So when Americans are captured, they are not tortured. That's the reason, in case anybody forgets it. That's the reason.

ASHCROFT: Well, as a person whose son is in the military now on active duty and has been in the Gulf within the last several months, I'm aware of those considerations. And I care about your son. I care about...

BIDEN: He's not there. He's in JAG and he's back here. But that's the reason.

ASHCROFT: He may not be there, but my son has been. And he happens to be stateside right now for more training, but he is scheduled to go back within the month.

BIDEN: (inaudible) Pristina. We're working for you guys. And the same thing occurred.

ASHCROFT: I just want you to know...

[gateley]

30. SELF DELETE because I'm too impatient. Don't ask.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

32. Very similar, but I think what I'm thinking of is much later. And yes,

Jack Nicholson all day long.

Ordering toast in Five Easy Pieces.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

34. I'll ask the friend I was watching it with. He has a better memory for detail

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

31. That's similar

but probably not the same. (2004 is too old)

Nice in that transcript that Biden was that assertive while in the minority, and when addressing a former memeber of the club (the senate)

That part where Biden's telling Ashcroft he's probably in contempt of congress is prime.

[ginchinchili]

11. The flip side of your argument is to go for someone lacking in electability.

In my opinion Kerry lost primarily due to 3 reasons, and I say this at the risk of upsetting some strong Kerry fans. Let me just say that I like Kerry and think he's a hell of a senator, but didn't think he was a very strong candidate.

1. He was challenging an incumbent, which is always difficult and certainly not Kerry's fault.
2. I thought Kerry should have focused his attack against Bush on what was perceived as Bush's strength: national security. He should have gone after him hard as soon as the nomination was his and that would necessarily included lambasting him for compromising our security and our military by unnecessarily invading Iraq. This should have been a relentless attack from the very start, like a bulldog with his jaws locked onto the leg of a thief in the night. He didn't. For too long Kerry just criticized Bush on his execution of military actions in Iraq after the initial invasion. Closer to the election, about 2 months prior, Kerry came out more forceful by saying, "wrong war, wrong place, wrong time," which, I thought, still came out less than unequivocal to the average, only mildly informed, American voter. Something to the effect of, Invading Iraq has been a mistake of historical proportions that actually weakens our national security, would have made his position absolutely clear. In a word, Kerry sometimes came across as equivocating, and that's the death knell for a presidential candidate. If there's one thing you can say about Joe Biden, it's that you'll know exactly where he stands if you listen to him, I'd say more so than any other candidate running, Democrat or Republican.
3. Kerry's 3rd disadvantage was not something of his making, and admittedly a subjective opinion on my part, and that is that he sometimes came across as being aloof. Part of that had to do with having more money than most of us could imagine. Part of it was the way he talked. He sometimes sounded like an Ivy League English professor, which may be a plus for many of us Democrats (I've got a degree in English myself), but in a general election in this country (not always the most culturally astute folks) it works against a candidate.

Joe Biden has none of this baggage, real or perceived.

[sampsonblk]

35. Your forgot one reason

Kerry's campaign was inept. I mean the day-to-day running of the campaign. It was disjointed, poorly-thought and amateurish.

If Biden is our nominee, he will surely win. I have no doubt. And I will certainly vote for him.

With the advantages our party enjoys right now, who in our party is unelectable?

[Steely_Dan]

13. He is the ONLY one....

As far as I'm concerned, Joe Biden is the ONLY candidate worth voting for. He is heads above all others. Regardless of what happens, I will be voting for Biden. I could give a damn whether he is considered "electable" or not. There's not even a close second.

In fact, here is my list of dem candidates in order of how I will vote"

1) Joe Biden
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)

I must vote my conscience. I could not sleep well at night if I didn't.

-P

[Think82]

14. BINGO

[gateley]

17. The contrast between Biden and the other candidates becomes more apparent

the more I see/hear them. For example, his warning of the Pakistan tinderbox during the debate on Tuesday. He strayed from the "candidate talk" of Iran and Iraq to present the reality that what we're facing in the ME goes beyond those two countries.

[ginchinchili]

18. Good point, and good example.

When this contest started I wasn't really considering Biden for some reason, even though I'd always liked him and often said he'd make a good president. And when he came out with the poorly worded Obama compliment, I thought, well, scratch him off the list. Then one day I was listening to NPR and one of their political commentators, David Brooks, of all people, made a comment about how foolish it would be for Democrats to cast aside someone so qualified and who actually speaks to the people unscripted and unfiltered simply because he misspoke. He also lamented the non-speak way all politicians, Democrats and Republicans alike, communicated with us. I agreed with that point. Not being very satisfied with any particular candidate, I decided to give Joe Biden another look. Once I started, my admiration, and soon my support, only grew stronger the more I learned about him, and the more I saw him and witnessed him speak. When I would compare his strengths and weaknesses to the other candidates, he continually came out on top. At that point I couldn't justify voting for anyone else, and he's only grown more in my estimation, becoming a much stronger candidate than I ever would have imagined. When I first started supporting him the possibility of switching to another candidate still existed for a while, but he's now too far out front of all the candidates and I'm also convinced that he'd be the strongest Democrat in a general election. And what fun such a general election would be with him as our standard bearer. Just look how he's handled Rudy in just a few exchanges.

I really can't afford it, but I'm going to donate another $100.00 to that bulldog standard bearer, just for leaving Rudy whimpering on the playground with his pants pulled down around his ankles.

[demommom]

19. K&R

[gateley]

21. Thank you for expressing my feelings in such an eloquent way. I have a hunch

you speak for many of the Bidenites. :yourock:

[Think82]

25. kick

[demommom]

24. K&R

[demommom]

27. K&R

[illinoisprogressive]

33. I've never thought he couldn't. I feel he is very electable.