[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34594675[/url]
[quote]US Vice-President Joe Biden has announced he will not run for the Democratic nomination in the 2016 White House race.
Making a surprise announcement in the White House Rose Garden, Mr Biden said there was not enough time left for him to mount a successful campaign.
He said it would be a mistake for Democrats to turn their backs on President Barack Obama's legacy.
Though he will not be a candidate, he said he "will not be silent".[/quote]
Finally
[editline]21st October 2015[/editline]
He was really biden his time huehue
Honestly I think a 72-year old might not make the best fit for a presidential candidate. With age comes wisdom, but also senility and tiredness.
Then again, both Trump and Sanders aren't exactly the youngest.
Great news for Bernie. (i think)
[editline]21st October 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=proch;48952421]Honestly I think a 72-year old might not make the best fit for a presidential candidate. With age comes wisdom, but also senility and tiredness.
Then again, both Trump and Sanders aren't exactly the youngest.[/QUOTE]
Sanders is old as fuck...
Having Biden removed from the polls should give us a much clearer picture of where the Clinton-Sanders race really stands
He doesn't have the balls.
That's surprising
after Hillary cockteased a presidential run for what seemed like a fucking year even though it was obvious she was going to run I kind of just assumed he was doing the same thing
[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;48952487]That's surprising
after Hillary cockteased a presidential run for what seemed like a fucking year even though it was obvious she was going to run I kind of just assumed he was doing the same thing[/QUOTE]
Hillary and cocktease should never be together. I don't think Biden would have much of a chance anyways, a lot of people would just see it as a third Obama term.
Aww. Biden seemed like he'd be a happy medium between Sanders and Clinton.
[QUOTE=Smug Bastard;48952558]Aww. Biden seemed like he'd be a happy medium between Sanders and Clinton.[/QUOTE]
Which is why he knows he can't run, He'll be taking lots of voters from both sides, weakening the democrats running candidate.
[QUOTE=old_hag12;48952434]Great news for Bernie. (i think)
[/QUOTE]
Really bad news for Bernie
[url]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html[/url]
It appears Clinton has got a great deal of his voters
[QUOTE=BusterBluth;48953914]Really bad news for Bernie
[url]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html[/url]
It appears Clinton has got a great deal of his voters[/QUOTE]
While right now Clinton will probably get his voters, this does create less competition for the Sanders campaign to work against. Now they can focus-fire entirely on Hillary without having to reserve money and energy toward weakening a third candidate's campaign.
Which is probably going to upset a lot of Democrats; it appears Sanders is the Trump of the left - the candidate the party as a whole doesn't really want in office but have to allow them to run anyway.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48953947]While right now Clinton will probably get his voters, this does create less competition for the Sanders campaign to work against. Now they can focus-fire entirely on Hillary without having to reserve money and energy toward weakening a third candidate's campaign.
Which is probably going to upset a lot of Democrats; it appears Sanders is the Trump of the left - the candidate the party as a whole doesn't really want in office but have to allow them to run anyway.[/QUOTE]
Bernie is moving the party back to where it used to be. Years of right-wingism has shifted the party to the center.
[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;48954012]Bernie is moving the party back to where it used to be. Years of right-wingism has shifted the party to the center.[/QUOTE]
He isn't really moving anything. Clinton has a pretty significant lead right now and I can't really see that changing
[editline]21st October 2015[/editline]
Ron Paul pulled about the same numbers last Republican primary when he was one of the last Republicans still standing, he never really had a chance though
[QUOTE=BusterBluth;48954037]He isn't really moving anything. Clinton has a pretty significant lead right now and I can't really see that changing
[editline]21st October 2015[/editline]
Ron Paul pulled about the same numbers last Republican primary when he was one of the last Republicans still standing, he never really had a chance though[/QUOTE]
Isn't everyone saying that Sanders is ahead of Obama in terms of where he was in 2008...
[QUOTE=proch;48952421]Honestly I think a 72-year old might not make the best fit for a presidential candidate. With age comes wisdom, but also senility and tiredness.
Then again, both Trump and Sanders aren't exactly the youngest.[/QUOTE]
depends there are plenty of active 70 year olds
[editline]21st October 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=old_hag12;48954250]Isn't everyone saying that Sanders is ahead of Obama in terms of where he was in 2008...[/QUOTE]
ya but again this is still ~4 months out from the important primaries
Good you creepy fuck, stay the hell away from the Whitehouse.
If Hillary is the Democratic nominee, I welcome our next Republican presidency.
[QUOTE=dbk21894;48954516]If Hillary is the Democratic nominee, I welcome our next Republican presidency.[/QUOTE]
I don't get why people say this, Hilary Clinton is far more acceptable than any republican.
[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48954534]I don't get why people say this, Hilary Clinton is far more acceptable than any republican.[/QUOTE]
I'm guessing that [I]part[/I] of the issue could be that she can have a tendency to not "stick to her guns" or "flip-flop" on some issues/topics. I can understand why someone may not want to vote for a candidate that doesn't always have a firm stance on an issue/topic.
It's really funny, because his whole speech sounded exactly as if he actually was running for Pres. You could've switched him saying No to Yes and the speech would still be perfect.
[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48954534]I don't get why people say this, Hilary Clinton is far more acceptable than any republican.[/QUOTE]
Acceptable than any republican? yes, acceptable by anyone with sanity? still a no.
[QUOTE=old_hag12;48954250]Isn't everyone saying that Sanders is ahead of Obama in terms of where he was in 2008...[/QUOTE]
That's not really fair, there were far more candidates competing at this time for the nomination than there are now for the party.
[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48954534]I don't get why people say this, Hilary Clinton is far more acceptable than any republican.[/QUOTE]
Except for the part where everything she says is a lie or hypocritical. i.e. she says she'll crack down on big banks when they're the top donors to her campaign.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;48954491]Good you creepy fuck, stay the hell away from the Whitehouse.[/QUOTE]
Sorry to tell you bro but he's already been in the White House a few times
[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48954534]I don't get why people say this, Hilary Clinton is far more acceptable than any republican.[/QUOTE]
She pretty much [i]is[/i] any republican that supports abortion and feminist ideals. She is a liar and she is very often likely to say/opine something she never has any intention of following up on.
She is 100% a Washington animal, and part of the current problem.
She hopped on the anti-gun surge so hard as of late that she said implementing some sort of gun takeaway program would not be a bad idea
That's gonna be forgotten and she'll flop back away from that eventually, especially if the gun lobby tosses any money her way. During the debate she seemed as dead, lifeless, and constructed as she always has. And she just skipped around answering any real questions, and dodged the email question completely (partially saved by Sanders).
I don't have a huge loveboner for Sanders, but I can't stand Hilary and I struggle to understand how anyone can. She just seems so vapid and puppeted to moneyed interests, and as 27X says she's part of the current problem.
This presidential race is fucked. We have three choices here, from the Republicans no matter how you cut it well have an asshole running; with the Democrats it's either Clinton or Sanders. The Democrats are not going to waste their nomination on Sanders, despite his *widespread* support he would be destroyed in the general election due to him being a self admitted 'socialist' and his inability to connect with anyone besides the youth or internet goers (among other things). This pretty much leaves us with Clinton. So we can either have a Republican beat out Clinton, a Republican beat out Sanders, or Clinton beat out a Republican and my money is on Clinton (but hey! That means Bill will be physically in the White House again)
I like Biden but honestly I don't see him being a great president
To me, the prospect of having Hillary as President means that things will stay the same way that they've been for the past 8 years. Which isn't the worst thing ever. However, with Bernie, at least I know where he stands and what to expect him to [i]attempt[/i] to do as President.
Nothing against Biden whatsoever, but I was honestly relieved to hear this news simply because it meant an end to all the distracting media hype. In my view, someone shouldn't appear on polls alongside declared candidates until they themselves have officially declared their own candidacy. Not to mention that all the hype probably put a lot of unnecessary pressure on Biden during a very difficult time in his life.
It would have been interesting to see how his campaign played out, but I'm glad he stuck to his guns and made the right choice for himself and his family.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.