216 Comments

Biden’s hubris is the biggest threat to this country and the world. He promised to be a one-term “bridge” president and should have kept that promise. What comes next will be his legacy. I’m disgusted with the Democrats for indulging him and risking everything we care about. Infuriating.

Expand full comment

This. Just as Nancy Pelosi worked to ready Hakeem Jeffries to be the Democratic leader, and retired from the speakership when she knew he could take the torch, so should Biden and the party have put together a plan for seeing that "bridge" pledge through. Yes, there were a million other things to do instead, but this should have been non-negotiable. I went to bed last night primarily feeling rage at the Democratic Party. Trump is essentially an anarchist; he doesn't play by the rules and never has. How was Biden going to flourish in that situation, even on his best day?

Expand full comment

Please don't call Trump an anarchist. Anarchism is a political movement that couldn't be further away from Trump. It definitely agrees to rules and playing by them. If you don't know anything about it, here's a famous one-liner from Bakunin (one of the fathers of anarchism): “Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice; socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality”.

Anarchism is regularly (and often deliberately) misused to mean chaos by political commentators in the media because it is by far the biggest threat to the powers that be. Don't aid the discrediting of one of the most vital counter-forces that exist. Even if you disagree with anarchism, use the right word for Trump. That word is fascist.

Expand full comment

I tend to use anarchy when I mean a deliberate attempt to destroy the existing social order but I should be more precise if that's not accurate. Doesn't it mean that? In a "small A" sort of way?

Expand full comment

In a political sense it doesn't mean that at all. Anarchism is a political current in its own right, with its own goals. Many of which are very hard to explain because it contradicts so heavily with what exists today.

People like Noam Chomsky and David Graeber were anarchists. Both actively opposed Trump.

What you mean is "insurgency" or if you want it to ring more positive "revolution".

I'd call both a decent enough term to describe Trump, but neither is complete. Both insurgents and revolutionaries have a goal. It's far better to describe them by naming them after the system for which they engage in insurgency/revolution. In the case of trump that is fascism. Making him a fascist.

Anarchist is definitely used in contemporary political commentary in the way that you use it. But it shouldn't be. Because it confuses the political ideology of anarchism with the individual will to create chaos without any goals whatsoever (violent nihilism). Politically speaking: it confuses two things that are diametrically opposed.

Anarchism as a political ideology has been around long before it was used in the way that you used it. It started to be used in that way to defame and discredit it.

Expand full comment

Thank you for educating me. I clearly need to do some reading in this area specifically. I agree he is a fascist, no doubt there.

Expand full comment

When did Biden say he would be a one-term President? I've searched for this and couldn't find that quote from him, but I did find a lot of commentary saying this is a popular myth.

Whether he SHOULD be a one-term President is a separate question, but I feel like we should still try to stick to some established facts while talking about it.

Expand full comment

It's fair to point out the fact that he didn't state it outright, or "promise" it.

That being said, he DID have his campaign-advisers say it to media outlets:

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/11/biden-single-term-082129

https://www.usnews.com/news/elections/articles/2019-12-11/joe-biden-suggests-he-would-only-serve-one-term-if-elected-president

The same way he has people "leak" his supposed "anger" at Israel's genocide. He wants people to believe he has humanity (despite all evidence to the contrary), so he has his aids tell the press what he wants people to believe.

In addition to having his people say it to the press, he did routinely imply that he would only serve one term — without saying it outright — whenever he was asked about it. (Including the use of that "bridge" metaphor.)

He didn't "promise," but people believed it because he WANTED people to believe it.

Expand full comment

I remember it clearly. He called himself a “bridge” between old guard Dems and a new generation.

Expand full comment

That's not a promise to serve only one term.

Expand full comment

I guess we fell into the trap of assuming that's what he meant. I did, anyway. Who'd want to be president at 80, under normal circumstances? I'd be exhausted.

Expand full comment

Look, if people want to say "Biden said he'd be a bridge to a new generation of Democratic leadership and I took that as a promise to serve only one term", I wouldn't have a problem with that. But he never said he would only serve one term, that's my only point. Maybe you think that's nit-picking, that he never said those exact words, but I feel like we're already drowning in politically motivated bullshit and half-truths and we don't need to be making more ourselves.

Expand full comment

Fair point. But that’s what I understood it to mean and I’m certainly not alone.

Expand full comment

Mehdi I agree with your comments. I would like to see you think about Jill Stein as someone to interview or elevate from a Canada perspective. The fact that we have a two political class system is really showing itself right now with the choice between the devil and dementia. It was really difficult to watch last night.

Expand full comment

Candidate not Canada! Although Canada is looking pretty good right now.

Expand full comment

Canada also has major challenges right now.

Expand full comment

😹

Expand full comment

I also fear that there is an excess of hubris right now. Both Biden and our Trudeau need to step back.

Expand full comment

Well said Mehdi. As someone living in Australia I cannot understand how Joe Biden could be the only candidate the Democrats have. It’s absolutely ludicrous.

Expand full comment

We had an open primary in 2020, many good candidates ran, the voters chose Biden. And I don't know how it works in Australia, but here, incumbent Presidents who choose to run again get the nomination of their party, even when they're unpopular. We had primaries this year too, and nobody except Dean Phillips, a Congressman from Minnesota, chose to run.

Expand full comment

This Australian is well aware that primaring the sitting incumbent is merely a convention. A tradition that clearly was irresponsible not to have bucked. They knew he was not strong enough to campaign so the Dems in the name of democracy, and to ensure the safety of democracy, should've had a robust primary. If only to sharpen up Biden for the campaign to come.

Now you Dems need to emulate the last 2 eps of The West Wing S6.

Expand full comment

Sorry, I'm puzzled by this "Should have had a robust primary" thing. Does this require other candidates? Where do they come from, if no candidates step forward? I like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren a lot, but if they choose not to run I can't hold a gun to their heads.

Expand full comment

The United States of Empire is finally experiencing the bad karma that it has created for three centuries. Genocide "from sea to shining sea"; slavery, including using slaves to build its capital; using wars of aggression to steal land from indigenous peoples; environmental degradation across this country; etc. And this doesn't even include what we've done around the world. Now we witness the complete corruption of our political leaders, with these two pathetic human beings representing the best America has to offer.

Expand full comment

Both parties need new candidates that really care for the American citizens and not compete who supports Israel more

Expand full comment

Here we go again Mehdi talking about trying to find the least of all evil between two evils to run this country when in fact there's already a good presidential candidate called Cornel West who should be leading this country as it stands today he is the best candidate there is and they're trying to block him from getting on the ballot in many of the states.

Isn't it time to start promoting someone who can actually lead this country rather than two criminals competing against each other in what represents two criminal parties both paid by the Zionist murderers?

Expand full comment

Mahdi knows that Cornel West does not stand a chance to win the election.

Expand full comment

Has Mehdi become God all of a sudden and we haven't been informed?

This is the kind of bullshit comment that people use that ends up being a self-fulfilling prophecy so enough of this type of nonsense. People could have said the same thing about Nelson Mandela when he was in jail! If someone in jail could win an election a free man like Cornell West who's smart intelligent that has a popular support across the country certainly can win as long as we who have some sense can support him instead of following the bullshit criminals that we have on our hands!

Expand full comment

Could the Cornell West supporters and the Jill Stein supporters talk things over and decide which one should be President? Thanks.

Expand full comment

They probably could and I recommend that they do but regardless of who ends up running they are going to face the same criminal opposition. The zionists are doing everything they can to prevent anyone other than Republicans and Democrats that they bought and owned of getting on the ballot!

Expand full comment

Ha ha, do you have much experience with the left?

Expand full comment

My God, Biden may not be aware that he has been authorizing the 2000-pound bombs that have been pulverizing Gaza and its children.  After all, he was "deeply disturbed" by reports that a woman allegedly attempted to drown a Palestinian-American child at a pool in Texas. This helpless deer caught in the headlight last night is responsible for the over 100,000 injured, dead and entombed Palestinians.

Expand full comment

I’m glad we saw what we saw last night (well, I couldn’t watch: nothing will forgive Biden’s stubborn old tyrant’s support for Netanyahu’s genocide) while, with swift footwork, we can replace him. Just don’t dither!

Expand full comment

I didn’t even watch! It is a disgrace and a clear indication of a putrified political and media system that lies to the American people! Horrible state of affairs nationally and internationally!

Expand full comment
Jun 28Edited

Why should 'D' party change Biden when their largest financial backers are the same ones supporting Trump? And even if they replace Biden, Jim Clyburn will just pick another corporate lobbyist.

I have always felt democrats only exist to make fascist republicans look good.

2 Steps needed to dissolve the 2 party system.

Rank-Choice Voting for every single(Local, State & Federal) vote you cast

And Outlaw legalized bribery i.e. Citizens United.

Expand full comment

I will never forgive Clyburn for guilting the people of SC into supporting Biden. That and all the other candidates for agreeing in the back room to step down, throw their support to Biden and screw us out of a Bernie Sanders candidacy. I'm looking at you Amy, Pete, et al.

Expand full comment

Think of it like this, Clyburn did exactly what he was supposed to do.

There is a saying in Signal Intelligence - "The medium is the message"

Expand full comment

It's called an endorsement, politicians do it all the time. If Clyburn's endorsement carried a lot of weight with SC voters, maybe it's because he's well respected among the people in the state he represents?

Expand full comment

Gee, Steve. I've never heard the word "endorsement" before. Thank you so, so much for your incredibly valuable insight.

Expand full comment

Well, if you act like you don't understand how Politics 101 works, then expect a lecture.

Expand full comment

Thank you so much again, Steve. Run along now and pester someone who cares about your opinion.

Expand full comment

Ooh, someone is being mean on the internet.

Expand full comment

Well I have to commend the overall quality of this conversation. Just kidding. Wake up and smell the coffee.

Trump is going to win this election if Biden is his opponent. Point blank. Anyone who thinks otherwise is absolutely clueless. Bidens ego and hubris are, unless he is stopped, going to take this nation over the cliff and the world with it.

Expand full comment

I have to disagree. Even though Biden put in a terrible performance last night, even republicans saw that trump was lying through his teeth constantly, and most don't like it! MSNBC was with 4 voters who appeared to be mostly republicans, and none of them liked what trump said, and all stated that they would not vote for him. Trump's hardcore base are the only ones who are 100% with him. Biden still has time to bring opinion back on his side, but he needs to be convincing, and he needs to articulate his plans much much better.

Expand full comment

I agree with Mehdi on this. Looking at Biden, not just yesterday but over the last years (even back in the 2020 campaign) feels and felt like seeing elder abuse. I don't know how what's the solution and who has to step up here but Biden has to step down!

Expand full comment

Biden lost my vote and support when he decided his support for Zionist is stronger than a genocide. Perhaps last night was a window to his [lack of] mental capacity and ability to think, analyze and communicate.

Expand full comment

Biden has even lost Joe Scarborough

Expand full comment

I wish all of us could lose Joe Scarborough.

Expand full comment

Thank you Mehdi, for devoting your time and energy to doing what you can to try to open the eyes of the Democrats, who as an institution have so far handled the rise of Trumpist fascism about as badly as many had feared.

Expand full comment

How could that possibly happen? Biden would first have to withdraw his candidacy.

But then, how democratically elect another presidential candidate at this stage?

I cannot be some backroom deal, right?

Although, how did Biden become the only viable Dem candidate in the first place?

Expand full comment

That’s the big question isn’t it? And that was the “back room deal” that got made, despite the fact that the majority of the electorate did not support his candidacy. The system is badly broken.

Expand full comment

"the majority of the electorate did not support his candidacy"

He won the Democratic primaries in 2020 pretty decisively. I didn't vote for him myself, but I can count.

Expand full comment

He has a 37% approval rating. It’s below 50% even with Democrats. Most voters don’t vote in the primaries. He’s going to lose.

Expand full comment

Maybe I'm confused by your use of past tense here, "did not support his candidacy." Of course the two previous times he ran, for the Democratic nomination and then in the general election in 2020, the majority of the electorate DID support his candidacy.

Expand full comment

If you're saying most people don't support his candidacy today, I wouldn't disagree.

Expand full comment

That’s what I’m saying. Sorry I wasn’t more clear.

Expand full comment

Medhi should do a show on this. Would Kamala be the easiest choice? The Democrats will tell you this sort of thing is impossible until it isn't.

Expand full comment

Open convention. Look it up.

Expand full comment

With Biden having 87% of the primary votes (before 'Uncommitted' with 4.3%) there is no-one with anything resembling a mandate except Biden.

So, a 'brokered' convention would have to choose someone without a mandate.

Electing someone is possible, it is the 'democratically elect' part that is not so easy.

Maybe Kamala Harris could have some claim to a mandate.

Expand full comment

That’d be par for the course—until recently.

When it comes to democracy, I’m more concerned with keeping out a guy who tried to overthrow the country by denying election results. Among other existential threats.

Expand full comment

It’s an artificial mandate though. The DNC killed any chance any other candidates may have had in the cradle.

Expand full comment

That's how it works yes, and the result is a potential disaster now.

Harris has been 'approved' in the primaries to become president in the not-so-unlikely event of Biden retiring, so she has some mandate.

Although Harris would not be the most promising candidate to defeat Trump, it would be the most straightforward choice. Maybe with a strong running mate, an effective campaign, and determined party support she might have a chance.

Expand full comment

Did you intend that to be condescending and facile? Political reporter here. What are your credentials besides snarkiness?

Expand full comment

Really? Who do you work for? Couldn’t find anything online.

Expand full comment

Probably because you’d have trouble finding your ass with both hands. I retired a few years ago.

Expand full comment

Who did you work for?

Expand full comment

That’s what I thought.

Expand full comment

I have been hoping for some sort of miracle that Biden would or could be replaced as the Democratic Party candidate and nominee ever since he announced that he would run for reelection. But the party, of which I have been a lifelong member, once again revealed it has morphed into something almost unrecognizable. A prerequisite for membership requires acceptance of lobbying money, fall in line and keep your mouth shut even when you disagree. The exemptions are the Squad and a handful of others and the party does not have their backs. If Biden were to expire before the election, who would be offered up as a replacement? Gavin Newsom? We’re in one hell of a mess and I must agree with the poster who called out US karma coming home to roost.

Expand full comment

"If Biden were to expire before the election..."

It's funny how the name of the current Vice President of the United States is so rarely mentioned here as the obvious replacement. In the case you mention, she wouldn't only be the obvious choice, she would be the choice REQUIRED by the US Constitution.

Expand full comment

For the remainder of his current term. Whatever.

Expand full comment

Yes, for the remainder of his current term. And also the presumptive Democratic nominee for the 2024 election. And, given that the primaries are over and we can't do them again, the only person who would have any legitimate claim to be the Democratic nominee.

Expand full comment

This morning I wondered what would happen if Biden went on to develop pneumonia and the decision would be forced. Also, why didn't the DNC push harder against certifying the candidate pre-election? Has to be a story there

Expand full comment

pre-convention

Expand full comment