Chris Christie Won’t Vote for Biden or Trump

If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

Via Taegan Goddard, I see that former New Jersey Governor and perennial GOP presidential candidate Chris Christie was on Meet The Press:

Chris Christie told NBC News that he “can’t see” himself voting for President Biden, adding that he wants to wait for the final list of contenders before he makes a choice.

Said Christie: “I can’t see myself voting for him because I don’t agree with his policies, and I have serious questions about his competence to serve another four years. So, do I rule it out? I can’t imagine doing it.”

At the same time, Christie said he wouldn’t vote for Donald Trump “under any circumstances.”

Here’s the video, embedded in a tweet:

I find this approach alternatingly amusing and frustrating. While I get that Christie is a traditional Republican and therefore disagrees with a lot of the policy positions of Biden, a Democrat, the fact of the matter is that there are two and only two viable candidates for President. To refuse to vote for either of them is to let others decide between them. To the extent one prefers one or the other, that’s simply cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Now, granted, whether Christie votes is completely irrelevant to the outcome of the race. There is no conceivable way Biden loses New Jersey, which has gone Democrat the last eight presidential elections and will do so for the foreseeable future absent a radical realignment. But there are plenty of folks out there like himself—homeless Republicans who think Trump is morally unfit for the office—who might be persuaded to hold their nose and vote for Biden with the nudging of Christie and other likeminded Republican leaders. Given that Christie knows damn well that Biden is better for the country than the alternative, abdicating that role is feckless at best.

FILED UNDER: 2024 Election, US Politics, , , , , , , , ,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is Professor and Department Head of Security Studies at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm veteran. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. Kathy says:

    One can vote for Biden and oppose his policies.

    Or maybe I truly don’t understand what the legislature and judiciary are supposed to do.

    ReplyReply
    7
  2. MarkedMan says:

    I see it as Christie trying to preserve a political future with Republican voters and funders.

    ReplyReply
    8
  3. Matt Bernius says:

    Thanks for highlighting the role that the Electoral College plays in helping shape this decision.

    ReplyReply
    1
  4. senyordave says:

    It’s not April Fools day, so putting forth the idea that Chris Christie would do the right thing because without it benefitting him is pretty absurd.

    ReplyReply
    3
  5. Scott F. says:

    @MarkedMan:
    “ I can’t imagine doing it [vote for Biden]” is Weaselish for “I will vote for Biden” when you still want to keep your Republican Country Club membership card. Whereas, “I won’t vote for Biden” is the truly feckless position James is pointing out.

    ReplyReply
    9
  6. Kevin says:

    @MarkedMan: He has no future with the Republican Party. He and others need to accept that. Until the party burns itself down, people who were Republicans with even moderate principals have no natural home. I’d argue that conservative people, under the original meaning, have a natural home in the Democrats, for the moment.

    ReplyReply
    8
  7. anjin-san says:

    Why on earth does anyone pay even the slightest attention to this guy?

    ReplyReply
    4
  8. DK says:

    JJ is correct here. But I’m down for a bunch of Republicans declining to vote at all.

    It may be less good than voting for his main opponent, but it less bad than them voting for Trump.

    ReplyReply
    8
  9. Jen says:

    Props for the Rush (the band, not the toxic radio host) subheader.

    Chris Christie is trying to figure out WTF he’s going to do with his time, methinks. I guess he doesn’t realize the conservative hack gravy train is probably off-limits to him now, and the Never Trump field has been cornered by the Lincoln Project crew.

    ReplyReply
    5
  10. Daryl says:

    This guy had stomach surgery and still can’t lose weight.
    Wouldn’t consider him a person of fortitude…of any type.
    I don’t agree with a lot that Biden does.
    I would be open to another candidate.
    But I’m still going to vote Blue because the MAGAverse is just too radical.
    And I’m not willing to be part of the ending of Democracy.

    ReplyReply
    6
  11. Ol Nat says:

    RIP Neil Peart

    ReplyReply
    4
  12. reid says:

    It may be true that his vote in NJ won’t really matter, but it would also be good for appearances to run up the popular vote as much as possible.

    ReplyReply
  13. TheRyGuy says:

    You can vote for anyone you want as long as you believe that vote is in the best interests of the country. If you think Biden is better for the country, vote for him. If you think Trump is better, vote for him. If you think they both suck, you are under no obligation to vote for either.

    The NeverTrump stuff is silly, which makes it perfect for the current GOP/conservative establishment. Their opposition to Trump is either fundamentally non-rational, entirely selfish, or based in support for policies that are unpopular with Republican voters.

    I mean, imagine if you met an adult who told you they hated asparagus so much they would rather starve to death than eat it. And not as a joke. Totally serious. They cannot conceive of anything worse than eating asparagus. NeverTrump is NeverAsparagus.

    If you can’t imagine a worse alternative than Donald Trump, may I suggest you refresh your memory of the Presidency of George W. Bush?

    ReplyReply
    1
  14. TheRyGuy says:

    @reid:

    Not to pop the info bubble around here, but Trump is either virtually tied with Biden or ahead in most national polling and doing even better in the “swing states.” Plenty of time for things to change, but Trump would currently have to be a substantial favorite to win the Electoral College and a slight favorite to win the popular vote as well.

    ReplyReply
  15. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @TheRyGuy:

    Their opposition to Trump is either fundamentally non-rational, entirely selfish, or based in support for policies that are unpopular with Republican voters.

    It’s not possible to be opposed to Trump because they either have always believed he wasn’t competent and/or because he showed that he isn’t up to it during the first run? Hmmm….

    ETA: Where can I get a container load of whatever it is that you’re smoking? Asking for a friend.

    ReplyReply
    6
  16. Jen says:

    @TheRyGuy:

    and a slight favorite to win the popular vote as well.

    I’m not sure how you came up with this, given the fact that it’s been almost 20 years since Republicans won the popular vote in ANY presidential election (Pres. Bush in 2004 was the last Republican to win both the popular and electoral college vote). And you think that Trump…somehow…will manage to change his luck third time around? That’s some optimism.

    ReplyReply
    7
  17. reid says:

    @Jen: Exactly. I don’t want to count my chickens before they hatch, but it’s hard to imagine that the guy who lost by over 7 million votes last time has done anything to improve things with voters with his nonstop lunacy and criminality. Not to mention the grim point that covid and four years will have done in many of his voters.

    ReplyReply
    4
  18. Matt Bernius says:

    @TheRyGuy:

    Not to pop the info bubble around here, but Trump is either virtually tied with Biden or ahead in most national polling and doing even better in the “swing states.” Plenty of time for things to change, but Trump would currently have to be a substantial favorite to win the Electoral College and a slight favorite to win the popular vote as well.

    I’ve offered this in the past in a case like this (where I think things will prove out very differently than where the polls are now):

    Any interest in a wager as to the election outcome?
    If I am reading you correctly, you are sure Trump will be the winner.

    Me, I think Biden will win.

    Any interest and what would you be willing to wager? Absolutely no pressure on that.

    ReplyReply
    3
  19. Matt Bernius says:

    @TheRyGuy:

    If you can’t imagine a worse alternative than Donald Trump, may I suggest you refresh your memory of the Presidency of George W. Bush?

    Two questions:
    1. What, in your opinion, made GWB’s president worse than Trump’s? I’m genuinely curious about that.
    2. Did you vote for GWB at the time?

    If you don’t feel comfortable disclosing 2, I understand. You strike me as pretty right wing/conservative so I’m curious if your decision about GWB was in retrospect or not.

    ReplyReply
    3
  20. DK says:

    @TheRyGuy:

    Trump would currently have to be a substantial favorite to win the Electoral College and a slight favorite to win the popular vote as well.

    Red Wave 2022!!!11!!

    ReplyReply
    3
  21. Andy says:

    To refuse to vote for either of them is to let others decide between them. To the extent one prefers one or the other, that’s simply cutting off your nose to spite your face.

    This is a long-standing disagreement between us, so I’ll restate that, in my opinion, voting is inherently an affirmative action. By voting, you tell the system that you support this person and affirmatively want them to be President.

    So what happens when you don’t want either of the “viable” candidates to be President?

    You’ve long argued (and correct me if I’m wrong and not characterizing you correctly) that the only moral thing to do is vote for the lesser evil of the viable candidates, even if the lesser evil is someone you fundamentally oppose.

    I think this view is flawed because there are limits to the compromises one can expect a person to make to vote strategically. In the extreme example, a contest where Hitler and Stalin are the two “viable” candidates, the objectively best choice is to vote for neither and that is not cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face.

    Additionally, it’s exactly this logic that results in a lot of votes for Trump since “lesser evil” is subjective. Certainly, many people voted for Trump in 2016 as the lesser evil compared to Clinton.

    How bad do the two viable candidates need to get before you’d consider breaking your rule and not voting for one of them? Everyone will have some threshold; only the most zealous will subsume all their political values and policy goals for pure binary strategic voting. The only difference between you and Christie is that his threshold is a lot higher than yours – and it’s not surprising that active members of a political party, even one opposed to the current nominal head of that party, would not vote for the candidates of the opposite party. That is, after all, the way parties are supposed to work.

    ReplyReply
    3
  22. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @TheRyGuy:

    Trump would currently have to be a substantial favorite to win the Electoral College and a slight favorite to win the popular vote as well.

    [flashers Grammar Police badge and ID]

    Just in passing, I need to note that this clause appears to be written in the subjunctive mood, given that /will/ needs to be used to make declarations and future tense shouldn’t be used in sentences with “currently” in them.

    Why is this important? In standard American English and outside of parliamentary diction, subjunctive mood is most frequently used for for statements contrary to fact. For example, in the old adage “if my mother had wheels, she’d be a teacart,” the “would” (expressed as/-‘d/) is used to show that she isn’t a teacart because she doesn’t have wheels. The case is similar for “if wishes were horses, even beggars would ride” and additional examples abound.

    So, in order to clarify what you mean here, would you please suggest what sort of contrary to reality condition would make Trump a favorite to win the electoral college and popular vote? The Trump statement will still be contrary to reality, but at least we’ll know what conditions you are imagining.

    ReplyReply
    5
  23. MarkedMan says:

    @Andy: You are free to vote for anyone you want to. It’s what I did when I voted for John Anderson in my first election. In the end, I think it was a wasted vote. Anderson had no chance of winning, but I was angry with Carter over his handling of the Iranian hostages, and I assumed no-one could possibly take Ronald Reagan’s folksy bullshit seriously. What can I say? I was an idiot.

    In a non-parliamentary system, voting third party is rarely (but not never) anything more than saying “I can’t see the difference between the two major party candidates”. If you can see the difference but still decide to go third party, then I have to respectfully disagree with you and conclude that you have wasted your vote.

    ReplyReply
    3
  24. steve says:

    Andy- If your hypothetical ever occurred, I might agree with you, but in this case one candidate for me has clearly many more bad qualities. I think Biden has some issues and I wish I had a better candidate but I dont so at least in my mind I am not so much voting for Biden as I am voting against Trump.

    Steve

    ReplyReply
    3
  25. Scott O says:

    If one doesn’t live in a swing state I think voting for a 3rd party candidate is a somewhat effective way of sending a message. My stress level since 2017 would be lower if 20% of Republicans in NJ, NY, Mass etc. had voted 3rd party.

    ReplyReply
    1
  26. DrDaveT says:

    @Andy:

    So what happens when you don’t want either of the “viable” candidates to be President?

    Then you look at what the likely outcomes are, depending on which one wins. And you do the thing that makes the better outcome more likely. If you genuinely don’t care who wins — if you think those are equally bad outcomes — then flip a coin, or don’t vote. If you have a preference, no matter how marginal, it’s just dumb to fail to act on that preference.

    If your vote were public, so that you felt yourself to be making a public statement that you might not wish to make, then things might be different. But they aren’t.

    ReplyReply
    3
  27. Andy says:

    @MarkedMan:

    Anyone who doesn’t vote for the winner has mathematically “wasted” their vote. And since we already know who will win most of the states, then voting for anyone but the presumptive winner in a “safe” state is entirely a waste of time and also a wasted vote.

    In either event, I do not understand the logic that suggests that fear of “wasting” one’s vote should determine who one votes for over one’s actual political preferences.

    @steve:

    Oh, I agree, I’m am voting for Biden over Trump. Biden is actually one of the better Presidents on the metrics I consider for President, albeit that is a low bar. I just think it’s silly to expect everyone – including politicians from the opposite party like Christie – to follow this strategery and vote for the party they oppose.

    If democracy is supposed to mean anything, it means that people ought to not only be able to affirmatively vote for someone they can at least nominally support, but do so without legions of naysayers lecturing them that they’ve “wasted” their vote because their candidate was not deemed “viable” by a brand label in a system that produces unrepresentative and unpopular candidates. It’s not clear to me that the way to fix that problem is to try to continue to perpetuate that system by shaming people into always and forevermore only voting for those “viable” but unpopular and flawed candidates.

    ReplyReply
    2
  28. Andy says:

    @MarkedMan:

    BTW, I was born in 1968, and that 1980 campaign was the first I was aware of. The main thing I remember about that campaign was not liking Carter because he refused to share a debate stage with Anderson.

    That very well could have been the gateway drug for me, not liking the two-party system and not liking how the two parties, despite their entrenched advantages, have continued to erect barriers to competition over the years. And lo and behold, here we are, forty years later, with two entrenched parties that are so weak to be mere brands, running candidates that are far below 50% in popularity, with no collective ability to replace them. And the demand, once more, as it was in 1980, is that the only right thing to do is vote for one of the “viable” candidates.

    I’m reminded of the definition of insanity…this state of affairs cannot continue forever, and being a “viable” candidate has to entail more than the letter before their name.

    ReplyReply
  29. TheRyGuy says:

    @Just nutha ignint cracker:

    Are you a NeverTrump Republican? Because that’s who I was talking about.

    ReplyReply
  30. TheRyGuy says:

    @Jen:

    It seems people around here are ignorant of these things called “facts” and “evidence.”

    https://www.realclearpolling.com/latest-polls/president/general-election

    ReplyReply
  31. TheRyGuy says:

    @Matt Bernius:

    1. Iraq. There are other things I could bring up…but why would I need to? The invasion of Iraq and the subsequent botching of the occupation are among the greatest foreign policy debacles in U.S. history. It was dumber, more destructive, and more plainly evil than anything Trump did as President and the gap is, as Trump would say, hyuuuuuge.

    2. I did vote for GWB. And when I and many other conservatives were told we HAD to vote for Jeb or Christie or Walker or Rubio, we responded with “Fuck, no! We are not voting for those jagoffs.” Think how much better off we’d be if liberals responded the same when told they HAD to vote for Biden.

    ReplyReply
  32. TheRyGuy says:

    @Matt Bernius:

    I have no idea who will win. I mean, if China invades Taiwan…what impact will that have? Would that be good for Biden or for Trump? Predicting is usually a fool’s game. No one on Earth thought Dirk and the Dallas Mavericks were going to beat LeBron James and the Miami Heat in the 2011 NBA Finals.

    People thought the Heat would win because the available evidence pointed toward that result. Likewise, the available evidence right now points toward a Trump win in November.

    ReplyReply
  33. just nutha says:

    @TheRyGuy: I’m not sure how that would justify not answering the question, but yes and no: yes, I’m not a Trump supporter and no, I don’t vote. I’m more an *always none of the above*.

    ReplyReply
  34. Matt Bernius says:

    @TheRyGuy:
    Thanks for the reply! I appreciate it. Some additional thoughts below:

    1. Iraq. There are other things I could bring up…but why would I need to? The invasion of Iraq and the subsequent botching of the occupation are among the greatest foreign policy debacles in U.S. history. It was dumber, more destructive, and more plainly evil than anything Trump did as President and the gap is, as Trump would say, hyuuuuuge.

    No arguement from me there. I agree. I also admit that while I did not vote for GWB at the time, I, like many Americans, believed some of the evidence presented for the war. If you feel comfortable sharing, did you agree with the invasion at the time?

    What changed your opinion? And when did it change?

    I also realize the “beyond that how was the play Mrs Lincoln” but were there other disappointments for you in the rest of the Bush administration.

    2. I did vote for GWB. And when I and many other conservatives were told we HAD to vote for Jeb or Christie or Walker or Rubio, we responded with “Fuck, no! We are not voting for those jagoffs.” Think how much better off we’d be if liberals responded the same when told they HAD to vote for Biden.

    In what way would be have been much better off? Serious question. I mean I think you believe a second Trump term would have been better than a Biden term, but you haven’t articulated why. Beyond tax cuts, Trump had no particularly notable legislative successes (the closest might be the Clean Slate Act, and most Republicans are not fans of that). Other than the feels and Supreme Court Justices, what did Trump accomplish?

    Remember, he was unable to pass Border Reform or Repeal Obamacare when he had a Republican Majority in both houses. And under Trump, Republicans lost both the House and the Senate.

    Do you think that inflation would not have happened? Or that, after being depressed by Covid-19 border crossings wouldn’t increase?

    Look, for the record, I’m not in love with Biden. But looking at the 2020 slate, I don’t think there was anyone I preferred that would have won that year. I chose and continue to choose the candidate that based on everything I think will be the best for the country and that remains Biden.

    I have no idea who will win.

    So the entire, “just wait 8 months Joyner and the rest of the OTB people will get yours” is a blustery tough guy act.

    Good to know. Sorry, you feel that you need to posture like that to be heard.

    Likewise, the available evidence right now points toward a Trump win in November.

    If you take a macro view, I guess it does. If you look historically, well it turns out that at this point in the 2020 race Trump was also leading in national polls:
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/trump-vs-biden-national-polls-2020-vs-2016/

    When you look at his historic performance at the polls in 2020 and 2016, I also think you get a lot of data that complicates that position.

    ReplyReply
    2
  35. TheRyGuy says:

    @just nutha:

    This is one of the great stupid things about the internet. You make a comment about Person A or Group A and someone who is neither Person A nor a member of Group A wants to argue with you about it while removing the context of the comment being about Person A or Group A.

    ReplyReply
  36. TheRyGuy says:

    Do you think that inflation would not have happened? Or that, after being depressed by Covid-19 border crossings wouldn’t increase?

    Some inflation would have no doubt happened but if you think the enormous government spending supported and signed into law by Biden didn’t have an effect on inflation, I think we have fundamentally different understandings of economics. I also think Trump would have at least TRIED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT INFLATION instead of just pretending it wasn’t happening for 2+ years.

    And while the “end” of the pandemic had something to do with border crossings, if you think Biden’s election and both his policies and public pronouncements weren’t also a big factor then you really need to climb out of the info bubble. And again, I think it’s beyond argument that if a re-elected Trump had been confronted with a mass uptick in illegal immigration, he would have at least tried to do something about it and not spent 2+ years pretending it wasn’t happening.

    But my comment wasn’t about voting for Trump over Biden. Sorry if that wasn’t clear. I was referencing the GOP primary. There were a lot of alternatives to Biden in the Dem primary. But instead of giving one of them the spot, Democratic voters were pretty blatantly told they HAD to vote for Biden. And they responded with “Yes, sir! Whatever you say, sir! How high should we jump, sir?” I almost certainly would not have liked a Warren or Bloomberg or Klobuchar or Sanders or Yang administration, but I am 100% sure any of them would have done a better job than Biden.

    If for no other reason, because they would have actually done the job. If you think Biden is in charge the way Trump or Obama or Bush or Clinton or any previous President of our lifetimes was in charge, you REALLY need to climb out of your info bubble.

    ReplyReply
  37. just nutha says:

    @TheRyGuy: So you’re choosing to not answer the question. Got it.

    ReplyReply
  38. Matt Bernius says:

    @TheRyGuy:

    There were a lot of alternatives to Biden in the Dem primary. But instead of giving one of them the spot, Democratic voters were pretty blatantly told they HAD to vote for Biden. And they responded with “Yes, sir! Whatever you say, sir! How high should we jump, sir?”

    My memory of the 2020 Democratic Primary is rather different than yours. Biden didn’t win the first few primaries and lost a number of the early States:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2020_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries

    Yes, the party did align behind him. But it wasn’t a cakewalk.

    ReplyReply
    2
  39. DrDaveT says:

    @TheRyGuy:

    I also think Trump would have at least TRIED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT INFLATION instead of just pretending it wasn’t happening for 2+ years.

    Given his response to COVID, why on earth would you think this? Or that, should he have wanted to do something, it would have had any (positive) effect?

    ReplyReply
    1
  40. TheRyGuy says:

    @just nutha:

    I’m not answering the question because you’re not asking it in good faith.

    ReplyReply
  41. Matt says:

    @DrDaveT: Don’t you know Trump is the only one who can fix everything!!. Why the only reason inflation happened is because Trump wasn’t our leader!! Never-mind that inflation hit the world and that the USA is coming out of it better than any other country. That corporate profits have shot up to all time highs. It’s all Biden’s fault inflation happened at all!!

    I’m pretty sure TheRyGuy is one of those people harping on egg prices as evidence that inflation is driving all prices beyond belief.. You know despite the whole bird flu culling causing supplies to drop tremendously. Never-mind that the “invisible hand” of the market aggravated this greatly due to the concentration of egg production into fewer and fewer hands.

    EDIT : I do hope TheRyGuy continues to interact with Bernius here because it’s the first time I’ve seen TheRyGuy make some decent points. For the most part I have to agree with their comments on Bush Jr. Though I do want to express some caution as we’re still tallying up Trump’s toll unlike Bush Jr.

    ReplyReply
  42. TheRyGuy says:

    @Matt Bernius:

    I didn’t say it was a cakewalk. But Dem party leadership (Obama) sent the word out that everybody had to get behind Biden. And that’s what Democrats, even ones who had considered and previously rejected him, did.

    Dem leadership could have picked someone else. Dem voters could have said “No.” They didn’t.

    You can criticize GOP voters for picking Trump. There are many good reasons to do so. But at least GOP voters weren’t sheep just doing what they were told to.

    ReplyReply
  43. Matt Bernius says:

    @TheRyGuy:

    I didn’t say it was a cakewalk. But Dem party leadership (Obama) sent the word out that everybody had to get behind Biden. And that’s what Democrats, even ones who had considered and previously rejected him, did.

    I’m fascinated by your narrative here. He still had to win the voters in 2020. And build coalitions. Go back to articles at that time and see how that was not in any way a “done deal” (especially with how long Sanders stayed in the race).

    And then he went on to defeat Trump in both the popular and the electoral vote.

    You can criticize GOP voters for picking Trump. There are many good reasons to do so. But at least GOP voters weren’t sheep just doing what they were told to.

    In 2016 sure. But 2024? You have had people running as “Trump light” (DeSantis) and the majority of the Republican party apparatus backing Trump from before the election (including being ok with him thumbing their nose at their own events). And most of his opponents dropped out early and endorsing him.

    And now you have him installing his daughter-in-law as the co-chair of the RNC. This “primary” has essentially been exactly the sort of corronation you are attacking the Democrats for.

    You have the candidate again who LOST the 2020 election, the Senate to the Democrats, and has had a lousy record on endorsements (https://www.politico.com/2022-election/results/trump-candidates-endorsements-11-8-22/). And yet he was the 2024 candidate after 1 primary and 2 caucuses (one that was set up by the Republicans in Nevada to ensure he got the delegates from that state after a screw up with the State primary). The finger has been on the button for Trump from a party perspective for a few years.

    No offense but your pot is looking rather black at the moment.

    ReplyReply
    1
  44. Matt says:

    @TheRyGuy: As a Democratic former two stepper I have no idea what you’re talking about. I didn’t receive any order from anyone to get behind Biden.

    How does that even work in your mind?

    EDIT : I voted for Buttigieg in the primary. My election vote went to “not Trump” because I already knew what a mess he is.

    ReplyReply
  45. TheRyGuy says:

    @DrDaveT:

    You might not have liked Trump’s response to COVID and you might be right about that. But he did respond. Trump did not spend months denying COVID existed. He did not spend months refusing to acknowledge or talk about it. His response might have been terrible, but he did respond.

    The Biden Administration spent 2+ years essentially hoping the problems of inflation and the U.S./Mexico border would just go away. Trump would not have done that. I don’t think Bloomberg or Warren or Sanders would have done that. I probably wouldn’t have agreed with their response but they would have done something.

    This is what I mean by info bubble. Three years after he left office, this blog still posts more about Trump than about the guy who is supposed to be President.

    ReplyReply
  46. Matt says:

    @TheRyGuy: Oh wow it’s like you’ve completely re-written internally what happened. It’s been public knowledge for a while that Trump’s reaction to covid was both slow and ineffective. Said reaction was at least somewhat guided by his desire to hurt blue states since that was where the early outbreaks appeared.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9115435/

    The Biden Administration spent 2+ years essentially hoping the problems of inflation and the U.S./Mexico border would just go away.

    I would LOVE to hear from you what you think Biden should of done to stop inflation 2 years ago.

    I do find the mention of the border somewhat hilarious because we just saw what happened when the Democrats attempted to negotiate/pass a comprehensive border bill with the GOP.

    This is what I mean by info bubble. Three years after he left office, this blog still posts more about Trump than about the guy who is supposed to be President.

    It’s almost as if Trump the guy who is the leader of one of the major political party keeps doing things that are news worthy…

    ReplyReply
  47. Matt Bernius says:

    @TheRyGuy:

    The Biden Administration spent 2+ years essentially hoping the problems of inflation and the U.S./Mexico border would just go away. Trump would not have done that. I don’t think Bloomberg or Warren or Sanders would have done that. I probably wouldn’t have agreed with their response but they would have done something.

    So I’m curious about your take on Trump’s decision to have the Republican’s scuttle the comprehensive border security funding bill in order for him to run on the border problem. Clearly, you think the border is an existential problem that needs to be fixed now.

    This is the bill in which the Senate Republicans got largely everything they were asking for and was supported by the Border Partrol union (which is no fan of Biden’s and typically a Trump-supporting organization).
    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/new-immigration-bill-senate-bipartisan-border-patrol-endorsement-rcna137354

    If Trump wins the election, what leads you to think that he’s successfully going to be able to pass a stronger bill when he couldn’t do it during his first term WITH a Republican majority? And if he doesn’t win, then the Republicans just pissed away the best chance they had to make a change, given that they only barely control the House.

    ReplyReply
  48. Matt Bernius says:

    @TheRyGuy:

    Three years after he left office, this blog still posts more about Trump than about the guy who is supposed to be President.

    Perhaps its because Trump is a nominee for President and we’re in an election year. There’s also all the inept criming he’s done and the various civil decisions and jury findings against him. Oh and that he’s more or less running the current clown car that is the Republican party.

    If he had accepted defeat in 2020 and did what most Presidents do and make way for younger talent (again, he’s only 4 years younger than Biden) we wouldn’t be discussing him now.

    Perhaps the concern is that we’re being too critical of Trump or not critical enough of Biden.

    ReplyReply
  49. Matt Bernius says:

    FWIW, @TheRyGuy, I appreciate finally getting a back-and-forth.

    ReplyReply
    1
  50. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @TheRyGuy: I don’t understand why you think my question is “not ask[ed] in good faith.” I honestly believe that some of the Never Trumps made their decision on the basis of believing–as I did from the day he came down on the elevator–that he was “not ready for prime time.” Why do you think that’s not so?

    Additionally, how is it that you criticize the Democrats for following orders (which I don’t recall being the case, BTW, he won pretty convincingly after a slow start*) and also criticize the Never Trumpers for not falling in line?

    *Now, if you have been trying to make a case that Biden didn’t get off the ground until Senator Clyburn essentially told black people in South Carolina that Biden was the choice and are using that as your start point for your getting in line argument, I’d be willing to consider that. However, I do need to note the Clyburn isn’t spelled O-B-A-M-A and would still wonder why South Carolina is the lynchpin, if you will, in Biden’s success (which may, in fact, be the case, I don’t follow election politics closely enough to make such a claim).

    ReplyReply
  51. DrDaveT says:

    @Matt:

    Though I do want to express some caution as we’re still tallying up Trump’s toll unlike Bush Jr.

    Indeed. I expect the eventual toll from our new Suborned Court to be significantly worse than that from the Bogus Iraq War, but that will take decades to play out.

    ReplyReply
  52. Matt Bernius says:

    @Just nutha ignint cracker:

    Now, if you have been trying to make a case that Biden didn’t get off the ground until Senator Clyburn essentially told black people in South Carolina that Biden was the choice

    Honestly, I think Clyburn’s role in this has been somewhat exaggerated (including by Clyburn himself). My understanding is that the Biden campaign had been doing significant outreach in the Black community. And I don’t think you can undervalue Biden’s connection to Obama.

    I tried to dig up some polls from that year but I could only find the final one. I thought I remembered that he had been leading there for a while, but the margins were no where near as big.

    Additionally, how is it that you criticize the Democrats for following orders (which I don’t recall being the case, BTW, he won pretty convincingly after a slow start*) and also criticize the Never Trumpers for not falling in line?

    Good catch! That does seem contradictory.

    ReplyReply
  53. DK says:

    @TheRyGuy:

    The Biden Administration spent 2+ years essentially hoping the problems of inflation and the U.S./Mexico border would just go away. Trump would not have done that.

    And over in reality, Trump spent his entire presidency screaming about migrant cqaravans, then failed to pass a border or immigration bill. Now Trump has killed a bipartisan border/Ukraine/Israel aid bill under Biden, because Trump hates America and loves Putin.

    This is what I mean by info bubble. Three years after he left office, this blog still posts more about Trump than about the guy who is supposed to be President.

    Ha! Imagine giving phony lectures about info bubbles in defense of Trump, a delusional con artist who still can’t admit he lost the 2020 election because he’s an unlikeable, incompetent drama queen whose presidency failed — even after his own judges, audits, and party officials rejected his sore loser election lies.

    That’s what normal people mean by info bubble.

    An info bubble is when you have to pay out nearly a billion dollars for peddling Trump’s deranged lies, as Fox News did. An info bubble is when you sack the Capitol to assassinate politicians trying to certify election results.

    An info bubble is when you run around screaming “Red Wave 2022!!” because you are clueless about how despicable and toxic your Putin-puppet party is to normal, decent Americans.

    This blog isn’t being sued for defamation — or being forced by lawyers issue retractions, as multiple MAGA blogs had to in the wake of Trump’s conspiracy coup. This blog’s readers didn’t storm the Capitol addled-up on disinformation and nonsense.

    But at least you tried.

    ReplyReply
    2
  54. wr says:

    @TheRyGuy: “You might not have liked Trump’s response to COVID and you might be right about that. But he did respond. Trump did not spend months denying COVID existed.”

    Except for those months when he was claiming it was “just one guy” on a ship and it was all going to be taken care of immediately.

    ReplyReply
    3
  55. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @Matt Bernius:

    Honestly, I think Clyburn’s role in this has been somewhat exaggerated

    As I noted to Ry, I don’t (and didn’t in 2019, either) follow Presidential races closely enough to go beyond being willing to consider arguments about diverging points. Your take is at least as good as my passing comment and probably better.

    And I am inclined to agree that Biden’s Obama connection is likely to have figured in his success strongly; that strength is still not the same as the claim that Obama essentially ordered Democrats to vote for Biden. Such an order is not in my recollection. Then again, I’m not a Democrat, so he might have missed me on the orders to the faithful email or whatever.

    ReplyReply
  56. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @wr: I may be wrong, but my recollection was that Trump’s early take was that it was just going to disappear (I think that was the word he used). It’s been almost 4 years now and we’re still waiting for it to just disappear based on the numbers of people I see wearing masks at the grocery store in the pretty bright red town I live in. We have almost as many people wearing masks as we did when Republicans were protesting the governor’s masking orders by refusing to wear masks because of their “asthma/breathing problems.”

    ReplyReply
  57. Matt Bernius says:

    @Just nutha ignint cracker:

    And I am inclined to agree that Biden’s Obama connection is likely to have figured in his success strongly; that strength is still not the same as the claim that Obama essentially ordered Democrats to vote for Biden. Such an order is not in my recollection.

    Speaking of closed ecosystems, that story, much like the idea that Obama and others are the Shadow Presidents, is a longstanding Right Wing Media talking point.

    Ditto the comments on Never Trumpers (and a number of other claims). They’re all chapter and verse in the current Doctrine.

    ReplyReply

Speak Your Mind

*