Joe Biden is not running

I just saw Bill Kristol on TV saying that Biden is definitely running. To me that means that Joe is definitely not running. No one has been more wrong on more things that Kristol.

At this point I hope he isn't running. I'm getting sick of the back and forth -- as my dear father used to say "sh*t or get off the pot"!

LOST said:
I just saw Bill Kristol on TV saying that Biden is definitely running. To me that means that Joe is definitely not running. No one has been more wrong on more things that Kristol.

Yup, you can take this to the bank.

At this point, given the reasonable performance by Clinton in the debates and the fact that she has sewn up a lot of "super delegate" endorsements, there is less pressure within the part for Joe to run.

I can see five scenarios:

1. He jumps in, beats the pants off of Clinton and Sanders, then wins the general election. If he does this he is a hero to the Democratic Party, especially if he also has some coattails and the Dems make inroads in Congressional races.

2. He jumps in, damages Clinton and/or Sanders, but either Clinton or Sanders still prevails. The Democratic candidate then beats the GOP candidate in the general. If this happens, Joe will be seen as a churlish egotist who almost blew it for the Democrats.

3. He runs, damages the others, and the Dems lose the general. He will be vilified almost as badly as Nader was.

4. He does not run, supports the nominee, who wins the general. Joe can retire as a revered elder statesman of the party, living a life of corporate speeches, campaign support outings, and friendly golf tournaments.

5. He does not run, supports the nominee, but the Dems lose anyway. Democrats will always wistfully wonder if Joe would have saved them and the country. Joe can retire as a revered elder statesman of the party, living a life of corporate speeches, campaign support outings, and friendly golf tournaments.

I think the safest bet for Joe is therefore not to run. He will come out of this in pretty good shape. But if he does run there is a very real risk that his standing and reputation will be harmed, if not ruined. Sure, if he absolutely feels he will win it all then that is the most optimal result of all for him. But the risk of two sub-optimal results and the negative implications for a career that he has carefully rebuilt after previous missteps are very very high. Is he that high of a roller at this stage of his career and life?

mfpark said:
At this point, given the reasonable performance by Clinton in the debates and the fact that she has sewn up a lot of "super delegate" endorsements, there is less pressure within the part for Joe to run.

I can see five scenarios:
1. He jumps in, beats the pants off of Clinton and Sanders, then wins the general election. If he does this he is a hero to the Democratic Party, especially if he also has some coattails and the Dems make inroads in Congressional races.
2. He jumps in, damages Clinton and/or Sanders, but either Clinton or Sanders still prevails. The Democratic candidate then beats the GOP candidate in the general. If this happens, Joe will be seen as a churlish egotist who almost blew it for the Democrats.
3. He runs, damages the others, and the Dems lose the general. He will be vilified almost as badly as Nader was.
4. He does not run, supports the nominee, who wins the general. Joe can retire as a revered elder statesman of the party, living a life of corporate speeches, campaign support outings, and friendly golf tournaments.
5. He does not run, supports the nominee, but the Dems lose anyway. Democrats will always wistfully wonder if Joe would have saved them and the country. Joe can retire as a revered elder statesman of the party, living a life of corporate speeches, campaign support outings, and friendly golf tournaments.
I think the safest bet for Joe is therefore not to run. He will come out of this in pretty good shape. But if he does run there is a very real risk that his standing and reputation will be harmed, if not ruined. Sure, if he absolutely feels he will win it all then that is the most optimal result of all for him. But the risk of two sub-optimal results and the negative implications for a career that he has carefully rebuilt after previous missteps are very very high. Is he that high of a roller at this stage of his career and life?

Your scenarios are accurate and reasonable, but what scenarios do you see if the FBI investigation actually turns up something damaging to her?

I would also guess Joe will wait to see how she does before the committee.

If the FBI turns up something fatal to Hillary's campaign all bets are off. Biden could get in at that point. O'Malley could become more viable. Sanders could become the odds-on front runner.

As to Hillary's appearance before the Committee there is almost nothing she could say that would seriously hurt her. It's far more likely that one or more of the Republicans will say something to help her.

LOST said:
If the FBI turns up something fatal to Hillary's campaign all bets are off. Biden could get in at that point. O'Malley could become more viable. Sanders could become the odds-on front runner.

Exactly.

But I will be very surprised if that happens. It is hard to believe that with all the GOP committee digging and newshound work that something that big is still looming out there, somehow still hidden in plain view or buried deep in someone's memory (human or computer).

I think it is far more likely that Uncle Joe fades into a very visible retirement where he can rally the troops with passionate speeches, play with his grand kids, and be an elder statesman for the party. Heck, he even might get a few non-official assignments like going to North Korea to secure a prisoner release or two.

mfpark said:

LOST said:
If the FBI turns up something fatal to Hillary's campaign all bets are off. Biden could get in at that point. O'Malley could become more viable. Sanders could become the odds-on front runner.

Exactly.
But I will be very surprised if that happens. It is hard to believe that with all the GOP committee digging and newshound work that something that big is still looming out there, somehow still hidden in plain view or buried deep in someone's memory (human or computer).
I think it is far more likely that Uncle Joe fades into a very visible retirement where he can rally the troops with passionate speeches, play with his grand kids, and be an elder statesman for the party. Heck, he even might get a few non-official assignments like going to North Korea to secure a prisoner release or two.

Gowdy claims to have 41 witnesses and 6 eye witnesses from whom the committee has never heard, as well as any E-mails which dealt with Benghazi that were found on her server. We don't know what that testimony will bring forth since Gowdy so far has played it close to his vest.

The FBI is potentially more dangerous to the Democrats since any 'smoking gun' could be discovered months from now could throw the party into chaos - or the whole thing can go up in smoke.

Note that most of the "new" interviewees have, in fact, been interviewed in non-Congressional inquiries. Gowdy is throwing around those numbers to generate headlines and make it seem like a bigger deal than it is.

BCC, I know you are fond of the Pinocchio Test, so you are probably aware that Gowdy's claim received two Pinocchios.

Here's a breakdown of the 30 truly new interviewees, according to the WaPo:

8 State employees serving in Benghazi who left five or more months before the attacks
4 CIA staff
3 Defense Department employees who corroborated testimony their superiors provided to Congress previously
3 information technology or records staff related to Clinton’s e-mails
2 Clinton speechwriters
2 State Department staff members who worked at the U.S. office at the United Nations
2 staff members of the press shop of the Near Eastern Bureau
1 Defense Intelligence Agency officer who previously responded to questions from Congress about Benghazi in writing
1 State Department employee who served in Benghazi and left more than a month before the attacks
1 State Department contracting officer
1 Diplomatic Security Operations Center staffer
Cheryl Mills, former Clinton chief of staff
Sidney Blumenthal, outside adviser to Clinton

BCC said:

mfpark said:

LOST said:
If the FBI turns up something fatal to Hillary's campaign all bets are off. Biden could get in at that point. O'Malley could become more viable. Sanders could become the odds-on front runner.

Exactly.
But I will be very surprised if that happens. It is hard to believe that with all the GOP committee digging and newshound work that something that big is still looming out there, somehow still hidden in plain view or buried deep in someone's memory (human or computer).
I think it is far more likely that Uncle Joe fades into a very visible retirement where he can rally the troops with passionate speeches, play with his grand kids, and be an elder statesman for the party. Heck, he even might get a few non-official assignments like going to North Korea to secure a prisoner release or two.

Gowdy claims to have 41 witnesses and 6 eye witnesses from whom the committee has never heard, as well as any E-mails which dealt with Benghazi that were found on her server. We don't know what that testimony will bring forth since Gowdy so far has played it close to his vest.
The FBI is potentially more dangerous to the Democrats since any 'smoking gun' could be discovered months from now could throw the party into chaos - or the whole thing can go up in smoke.

“I have here in my hand a list of 205 [State Department employees] that were known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping the policy of the State Department.”

mfpark said:

BCC said:

mfpark said:

LOST said:
If the FBI turns up something fatal to Hillary's campaign all bets are off. Biden could get in at that point. O'Malley could become more viable. Sanders could become the odds-on front runner.

Exactly.
But I will be very surprised if that happens. It is hard to believe that with all the GOP committee digging and newshound work that something that big is still looming out there, somehow still hidden in plain view or buried deep in someone's memory (human or computer).
I think it is far more likely that Uncle Joe fades into a very visible retirement where he can rally the troops with passionate speeches, play with his grand kids, and be an elder statesman for the party. Heck, he even might get a few non-official assignments like going to North Korea to secure a prisoner release or two.

Gowdy claims to have 41 witnesses and 6 eye witnesses from whom the committee has never heard, as well as any E-mails which dealt with Benghazi that were found on her server. We don't know what that testimony will bring forth since Gowdy so far has played it close to his vest.
The FBI is potentially more dangerous to the Democrats since any 'smoking gun' could be discovered months from now could throw the party into chaos - or the whole thing can go up in smoke.

“I have here in my hand a list of 205 [State Department employees] that were known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping the policy of the State Department.”

'Still, there’s nothing wrong with saying that the committee has conducted 30 new interviews — and found three new eyewitnesses. Or, more precisely, the committee could say it has interviewed a total of
53 people, including 30 who have not been interviewed previously and 10 who were in Benghazi on the night of the attacks.
We appreciate the fact that the committee released a corrected version of the letter. And we understand that Gowdy was speaking on live television and perhaps did not mean to mention the ARB, preferring to keep the focus on interviews conducted by Congress. But there’s little reason to hype the numbers and better to remain as precise as possible.
Two Pinocchios'

You're comparing ,Gowdy to Joe McCarthy? Really?

There's little reason to hype the numbers... except to hype the numbers (and get people on political message boards to believe them and post them repeatedly).

BCC said:

mfpark said:

BCC said:

mfpark said:

LOST said:
If the FBI turns up something fatal to Hillary's campaign all bets are off. Biden could get in at that point. O'Malley could become more viable. Sanders could become the odds-on front runner.

Exactly.
But I will be very surprised if that happens. It is hard to believe that with all the GOP committee digging and newshound work that something that big is still looming out there, somehow still hidden in plain view or buried deep in someone's memory (human or computer).
I think it is far more likely that Uncle Joe fades into a very visible retirement where he can rally the troops with passionate speeches, play with his grand kids, and be an elder statesman for the party. Heck, he even might get a few non-official assignments like going to North Korea to secure a prisoner release or two.

Gowdy claims to have 41 witnesses and 6 eye witnesses from whom the committee has never heard, as well as any E-mails which dealt with Benghazi that were found on her server. We don't know what that testimony will bring forth since Gowdy so far has played it close to his vest.
The FBI is potentially more dangerous to the Democrats since any 'smoking gun' could be discovered months from now could throw the party into chaos - or the whole thing can go up in smoke.

“I have here in my hand a list of 205 [State Department employees] that were known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping the policy of the State Department.”

'Still, there’s nothing wrong with saying that the committee has conducted 30 new interviews — and found three new eyewitnesses. Or, more precisely, the committee could say it has interviewed a total of
53 people, including 30 who have not been interviewed previously and 10 who were in Benghazi on the night of the attacks.
We appreciate the fact that the committee released a corrected version of the letter. And we understand that Gowdy was speaking on live television and perhaps did not mean to mention the ARB, preferring to keep the focus on interviews conducted by Congress. But there’s little reason to hype the numbers and better to remain as precise as possible.
Two Pinocchios'
You're comparing ,Gowdy to Joe McCarthy? Really?

Yes, I am.

mfpark's being kind to Gowdy.

I believe McCarthy had only one committee. GOP has 8.

I think we need to make it a word. "Don't be so Gowdy!"

And, as I mentioned on another thread, at least one GOPer is already talking impeachment - of Hillary!

Is it just me or does he look like Tom Petty?

GL2 said:
And, as I mentioned on another thread, at least one GOPer is already talking impeachment - of Hillary!

They're pre-impeaching Chelsea now, just in case

Oh no! Jim Webb is quitting the "race."

ridski said:

GL2 said:
And, as I mentioned on another thread, at least one GOPer is already talking impeachment - of Hillary!

They're pre-impeaching Chelsea now, just in case

the baby is pretty suspicious-looking too.

GL2 said:
Oh no! Jim Webb is quitting the "race."

I read he may run as an independent

ridski said:

GL2 said:
Oh no! Jim Webb is quitting the "race."

I read he may run as an independent

he's got the Joe-mentum

GL2 said:
Oh no! Jim Webb is quitting the "race."

He was running? I must have missed that one.

GL2 said:
And, as I mentioned on another thread, at least one GOPer is already talking impeachment - of Hillary!

I'm pretty sure they think "impeach" means "make a strong statement we don't like this person."

ridski said:

GL2 said:
Oh no! Jim Webb is quitting the "race."

I read he may run as an independent

My first thought was that he'd be handing the election to the GOP. Then I realized no one outside Washington, Virginia and message boards like this, actually remembers or cares who he is.

ParticleMan said:

ridski said:

GL2 said:
Oh no! Jim Webb is quitting the "race."

I read he may run as an independent

My first thought was that he'd be handing the election to the GOP. Then I realized no one outside Washington, Virginia and message boards like this, actually remembers or cares who he is.

He really seems to hate campaigning. Frankly, I think he hates politics.

So I find it hard to believe he's going to do much of anything.

mjh said:

ParticleMan said:

ridski said:

GL2 said:
Oh no! Jim Webb is quitting the "race."

I read he may run as an independent

My first thought was that he'd be handing the election to the GOP. Then I realized no one outside Washington, Virginia and message boards like this, actually remembers or cares who he is.

He really seems to hate campaigning. Frankly, I think he hates politics.
So I find it hard to believe he's going to do much of anything.

But he does like telling us that he killed a man.

BTW, from what I have heard, he was roundly disliked in DC, from the Hill to the Pentagon.

ParticleMan said:

ridski said:

GL2 said:
Oh no! Jim Webb is quitting the "race."

I read he may run as an independent

My first thought was that he'd be handing the election to the GOP. Then I realized no one outside Washington, Virginia and message boards like this, actually remembers or cares who he is.

He could actually poll to the left of the decimal point.

Sounds like Biden's running:

Joe Biden changes story on Osama bin Laden raid

Washington (CNN)Vice President Joe Biden offered an account Tuesday of the decision to launch the raid that killed Osama bin Laden that differed from some of his previous retellings -- and from Hillary Clinton's.
His remarks come as he considers facing off against the former secretary of state in the 2016 presidential race, and they seem to signal that he sees his earlier stance on the raid as a potential liability.

At an event honoring former Vice President Walter Mondale, Biden said he had privately advised the President to pursue the raid on bin Laden's compound after initially advising a more cautious approach at a Cabinet meeting.

"We walked out of the room and walked up stairs," Biden said. "I told him my opinion: I thought he should go, but to follow his own instincts."

The new account is a significant departure from what he said at a Democratic retreat in January 2012.

"Mr. President, my suggestion is, 'Don't go,'" Biden said, according to an ABC News report from that time.
"We have to do two more things to see if he's there,'" Biden recalled, though story did not include what those two things were.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/20/politics/joe-biden-osama-bin-laden-raid/index.html