June 12, 2019

"The president is literally an existential threat to America," said Joe Biden.

Quoted in "Biden and Trump exchange fire in Iowa, ignoring others in the field" (WaPo), teased on the front page as "In Iowa, the feud between Trump and Biden gains strength/President Trump and former vice president Joe Biden ridiculed one another in the harshest terms they’ve used so far."

Trump's response isn't specific to Biden's "literally... existential" barb, just the idea that "Joe is weak mentally":


Years ago, Trump insults, Biden was nothing, polling at 1%, until Obama picked him "off the trash heap." Now, Biden is doing well in the polls, but "he's a different guy. He looks different than he used to. He acts different than he used to. He’s even slower than he used to be.... Joe Biden is a dummy."

By the way, Trump was speaking before going to Iowa, so the teaser headline — with "in Iowa" — is factually wrong. It's got to be like with roaches. If you see one, there are a thousand more that you're not seeing.

What, if anything, do you think Biden is trying to say when he calls Trump an "existential threat"? Underscored with "literally," it should mean that, with Trump, there's a danger that America will cease to exist. I think he's trying to say the America we know and love is threatened by Trump. But to find that meaning, we can't take "literally" literally.

I don't know if I want to make a tag for "Biden rhetoric." Biden's use of language is not very snappy. I don't know if I want to get into a pedantic critique of the use of multisyllabic confusing words like "literally" and "existential."

Do you think some people see Biden gesturing at the philosophy of existentialism? The OED says "existential" can mean, "Of, relating to, or concerned with individual human existence, esp. as seen from the point of view of existentialism; of, relating to, or characteristic of existentialism; having, or prompted by, a keen awareness of individual freedom and responsibility."

ADDED: Maybe what I need is a tag, "Existential Biden." Using those words, I found, "Why Is Joe Biden the Only Democrat Who Wants to Talk About Donald Trump?," by Susan B. Glasser in The New Yorker, April 26, 2019:
Given the almost numbing predictability of the President and the ever-increasing difficulty his critics have mustering outrage toward him at this point, it came as a jolt to see Joe Biden go directly at Trump in a video announcing his Presidential campaign, on Thursday. The seventy-six-year-old former Vice-President unabashedly took the Trump-bashing course that most of the eighteen other declared Democratic candidates for 2020 have eschewed. In his launch video, which is three minutes and thirty seconds of Biden mostly talking into the camera, he calls Trump a “threat to this nation . . . unlike any I had ever seen in my lifetime” and an existential challenge to the very idea of American democracy. The election of 2020 is “the battle for the soul of the nation,” Biden says, and, if Trump is reëlected, “he will forever and fundamentally alter the character of” the country. In short, Biden adds, “Everything that has made America America is at stake.”
So this "existentialism" is Biden's theme. It shouldn't be confusing!

248 comments:

1 – 200 of 248   Newer›   Newest»
rehajm said...

I just read Chuck trying to invent stronger hyperbole to comment about Trump’s something or other. Failing miserably. Looks like Biden’s speechwriter is in the same bind.

Chuck said...

Trump looks different too. When did Trump become a kind of a blonde? I don't know which is weirder; Biden's strange botox-altered frown lines, or Trump's baby blue eye sockets where it looks to be shaded from the tanning bed.

Shane said...

"Do you think some people see Biden gesturing at the philosophy of existentialism? "

Um, no. I think people see Biden and the only thought, if anything, is glad-handing political opportunist.

Chuck said...

rehjam; if you want to characterize me, do it accurately. I was commenting in the last "café" post about Trump's siding with the North Korean dictator over the U.S. CIA. And it really is an astonishing Trump statement/story.

Matt Sablan said...

Does Biden believe Trump colluded with Russia? If yes the literally may be that. He may literally think Trump is conspiring with Russia. Journalists should ask if he thinks Trump is a Russian agent.

tim maguire said...

The "existential threat" claim may have had some oomph in 2016, but now that Trump's been in the White House 2 1/2 years and the only thing that's changed is that people's lives have gotten better, it just tells me Biden needs to update his "stuff to plagiarize" list.

Using "literally" to mean "figuratively" is one of my pet peeves. Using "existential" to mean "I want to spark a strong emotional reaction in you" just means Joe Biden is a politician.

Scott Gustafson said...

Isn't this just Biden using another way to say, "Trump is Hitler." It's been the Democrat meme for the last 70 years.

rhhardin said...

The difference between existential and universal explained
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNTmhQu3EA8

Matt Sablan said...

I don't see why anyone thinks he doesn't mean literally when a talking point since the election is Trump was compromised by Russia and must be resisted by any means necessary so he doesn't sell us out to Putin. That's why he's got to be impeached. It is why there was a multi year investigation. This is a standard left wing honest to God belief that Trump in collusion with Russia wants to destroy America.

Until Biden publicly denounced that theory, I see no reason to pretend his literally isn't meant literally.

Jeff Brokaw said...

Trump's insults are at least believable, usually funny, and mostly pretty accurate. He's good at it.

"Existential threat to America" is not believable. Or funny. Or rven remotely accurate.

rhhardin said...

There exists a politician such that that politician is a threat to America.

That's existential.

All politicians are a threat to America.

That's universal.

Nobody said...

Trump is better at figurative language than Biden. That much is clear. I know there are people who have problems with figurative language and have to have everything explained to them as if they were little children, (ahem, Chuck), but it’s a very powerful way to express ideas to normal people.

Chuck said...

tim maguire said...
The "existential threat" claim may have had some oomph in 2016, but now that Trump's been in the White House 2 1/2 years and the only thing that's changed is that people's lives have gotten better, it just tells me Biden needs to update his "stuff to plagiarize" list.

Using "literally" to mean "figuratively" is one of my pet peeves. Using "existential" to mean "I want to spark a strong emotional reaction in you" just means Joe Biden is a politician.


You're right, of course, about Joe Biden's verbal tics. The only one worse than Biden in that regard is Trump. "Incredible." "No one has seen..." "We'll see..." "Beautiful..." "Strongly..." "Believe me..."

rhhardin said...

Literally is an intensifier. It's used to mean "so much so that it might as well be literally."

No logic prevents literally from being used figuratively, like any other word.

Nobody said...

It’s all part of the “accuse the Republicans of what it is you are doing yourself.” If anybody is trying to destroy the US, it’s the guy who thinks that our borders should be erased and our heavy industry should be sent to China and all auto manufacturing should be exported to Japan and Europe.

I Callahan said...

I was commenting in the last "café" post about Trump's siding with the North Korean dictator over the U.S.

Reading the Atlantic again, I see. Such a bastion of objectivity.

Is it any wonder no one around here ever takes you seriously?

Chuck said...

Nobody said...
Trump is better at figurative language than Biden. That much is clear. I know there are people who have problems with figurative language and have to have everything explained to them as if they were little children, (ahem, Chuck), but it’s a very powerful way to express ideas to normal people.


Horseshit.

I want things explained clearly. Using precise language, not childish language. I'm a lawyer and a student of political science. I don't want childish language. I want Churchill; I want Bill Buckley; I want George Will; I want Justin Amash.

The Trump Cult want Sean Hannity,

Ignorance is Bliss said...

It's got to be like with roaches. If you see one, there are a thousand more that you're not seeing.

I assume this is in reference to Democrat Presidential candidates, right?

Nobody said...

This is the Johnson Daisy ad. Except after 60 yrs, it’s sort of losing its punch.

rhhardin said...

The negation of Biden would be "The President is not literally an existential threat to America."

That form would encourage you to take literally literally, as there's no purpose for an intensifier there.

iowan2 said...

All the leftist had are broad smears.(hmm, smears...some poster here advocates smears) nothing specific. Specifics get fact checked.
President Trump is a racist, until the NYT writes a length article to prove it. They come up empty. We are supposed to believe that a business man of over 5 decades, interactions with untold XXX thousands of individuals and not a single instance. Not one. Not one in more than 5 decades of business.
Nope specifics don't work. Broad formless smears of nothingness are the perfect attack model.

Like the leftist "investigations" Democrats what all this information to investigate, they just refuse to get specific.

rhhardin said...

I want things explained clearly. Using precise language, not childish language. I'm a lawyer and a student of political science. I don't want childish language. I want Churchill; I want Bill Buckley; I want George Will; I want Justin Amash.

Or Jane Austin.

rhhardin said...

Austen

Nobody said...

I want things explained clearly. Using precise language, not childish language

Sorry that you are so simple minded. The last thing I want is another lawyer president.

Hagar said...

I was thinking about this yesterday. If anything, Trump is an exemplar of "democracy in America;" a brash New Yorker sounding off to anyone he meets, high or low, but also takes the comeback with a grin, not threats and certainly not action.

Now compare this with the behavior of the Democrat left.

Nobody said...

“Justin Amash.”

Yeah, the guy who has a company that exports Michigan jobs to China. Why isn’t he honest about why he dislikes Trump?

Bob Boyd said...

"Existential threat" is a popular term in the media these days. I've noticed people using it a lot. Biden's just using it for that reason.
Can you imagine how the left would shriek if Trump started investigating candidate Biden's ties to China or the Ukraine now that he's running?

Chuck said...

Althouse, you've got a tag for "Trump rhetoric." Perusing posts with that tag, I had trouble finding a single one where you took the tagged occasion to criticize or ridicule anything that Trump has said. My own vague recollection is that in the history of that tag, there may have been just once or twice that you were critical of Trump. Do you disagree?

I Callahan said...

I want things explained clearly. Using precise language, not childish language. I'm a lawyer and a student of political science. I don't want childish language. I want Churchill; I want Bill Buckley; I want George Will; I want Justin Amash.

I have a college degree, and have been in my field for the past 30 years. I read voraciously, every day. I have absolutely no issue with how Trump explains anything. I understand it through and through.

I find it funny that you choose Justin Amash, when he is the opposite of that. In numerous twitter screeds, he couldn't actually establish why Trump should be impeached, and used a lot of "precise" language to hint that he should, without actually stating a reason.

But then, he's like you - so terminally affected by TDS that logical thinking is no longer possible.

Kevin said...

No logic prevents literally from being used figuratively, like any other word.

Except the logic that we use so many words figuratively these days we need a word to indicate when we’re not doing that.

Bob Boyd said...

not childish language

I want I want I want!

Quaestor said...

I don't know if I want to get into a pedantic critique of the use of multisyllabic confusing words like "literally" and "existential".

Althouse is going to need the tag.

Unfortunately, the simplest interpretation of Biden's remarks is the man doesn't understand the term existential and thinks literally is merely an emphatic, like Trump's typical use of great, in other words his brain functions on the same level as those misbegotten SWJ chicks who claim the President is "literally Hitler".

Nobody said...

Why don’t you give us an example of Amash’s “clear and precise” reasons why he thinks Trump should be impeached so that we can see that his reasoning is not affected by his belief that he should profit by taking advantage of Chinese currency manipulation and lack of any labor protections.

Phil 314 said...

I want Chuck and Drago to be out two candidates. It’s so much fun to watch the verbal sparring.

Enlightening too!

Larry J said...

By exposing the corruption in the Deep State, especially the Intelligence Community and FBI, Trump is a threat to what the Democrats have spent decades building. If you think of the Democrats as a very large organized crime ring that uses politics as a means to their ends, it all makes sense.

Kevin said...

Biden believes Trump is truly an existential threat.

It’s “America” that he’s using figuratively.

Nobody said...

Oh yeah, and Amash is all for the dumping into the US of subsidized Chinese steel. I would love to hear him defend that in clear and precise language.

Nancy said...

"Unabashedly bashing"? Now, that's some rhetoric!

Nobody said...

It’s “America” that he’s using figuratively.

LOL, he really means the deep state and America’s “elites."

Shouting Thomas said...

This "fundamentally transform" and "fundamentally change" bullshit is so tiresome.

Who wants a politician to reshape the U.S.?

The belief that government can, should, or ought to radically transform the U.S. is communism.

Automatic_Wing said...

Churchill and Justin Amash, lol.

Nobody said...

If you think that Amash is being clear and precise, then you are just as susceptible to word salad rhetoric as you claim that Trump supporters are, you just disagree with Trump and agree with Amash, although I don’t see that there is anything in Amash to agree with beyond “orange man bad."

wwww said...

"What, if anything, do you think Biden is trying to say when he calls Trump an "existential threat"?"

This answer is not complicated. He is running a primary campaign for Democratic candidate. In other words: he is saying stuff he thinks will appeal to regular Democratic primary voters.

Is this the new media fascination? Micro-analysis of the pre-primary and primary rhetoric" . If so, it'll go on, in tedious fashion, for months and months. Another reason I find little interest in following domestic political news.

Now, following the Hong Kong protests...that's interesting.

Nobody said...

I gotta go, but when I get back, I expect to see a selection of verbiage here from Amash that delineates his reasons that Trump should be impeached with lawyerly precision.

David Begley said...

Joe’s claim is completely absurd. The way I see it, Trump has saved America. And he was the only one who could do it.

With Hillary in charge, we’d have 5 million new illegal aliens here this year.

Joe is just trying to scare weak minded people.

David Begley said...

The Dems constantly say they want to unite America. Saying Trump is Hitler won’t work.

Chuck said...

Nobody said...
“Justin Amash.”

Yeah, the guy who has a company that exports Michigan jobs to China. Why isn’t he honest about why he dislikes Trump?


You fucking liar.

Is it chutzpah, or stupidity, or trolling that has you forgetting about all of the Donald Trump- and Ivanka Trump-branded products that were made in China?

cacimbo said...

Biden is leading in polls because Dem voters envision he can beat Trump. By attacking/triggering Trump too early voters get to see how poorly he looks against Trump - while they still have plenty of time to pick another nominee. Proving Trump right - Biden is dumb.

Mike Sylwester said...

In my blog about the movie Dirty Dancing, I published an article titled Baby Houseman and Existentialism.

buwaya said...

wwww is correct.

This is deployment of words as weapons.
A review of the modes of rhetoric in Cicero's masterpiece "On Rhetoric" may assist.

Using "literally" or other such words as an intensifier is a technique discussed in Cicero under several categories. Whether they need to be "properly" used is a question of the purpose of the oration and its audience. Roman audiences were apparently very tough though.

Chuck said...

David Begley said...
Joe’s claim is completely absurd. The way I see it, Trump has saved America. And he was the only one who could do it.


That's a fascinating contention. I take it that "illegal immigration" is your Number 1 reason for your contention. What else is there? Be very specific.

Because my contention is that under ANY Republican president, we would have gotten Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, and regulatory reform. All of which have been very good, but hardly necessary for the survival of the nation.

What would have been worse under a President Cruz? A President Jeb Bush? A President Rubio?

If your contention is that only one Republican nominee (Trump) could ever have beaten Hillary, I'd need some data to believe that. Then I'd also want to hear from voters who voted for Trump, but who otherwise would have (a) not voted; (b) voted for Hillary, or (c) voted for someone else, rather than for a Republican for President. That right there is the essence of the Trump Cult. That it is all about Trump; only Trump, and Trump alone.

EDH said...

Chuck said...
You fucking liar.

I don't know the truth of the matter, but Chuck links to an article parroting Amash's own words to declare Nobody a "fucking liar"?

Amash responded with a smile, “I do not have a factory in China. I own part of our family’s business here in Michigan, so it’s in Wyoming. So, I’m a part shareholder in our family business. Our family business does less than 10 percent of its products from China.” He elaborated that, “the rest of the purchases are United States or primarily Taiwan.”

Amash acknowledged that his “brothers do own a trading company that does business in China.” However, he stated, “I don’t own it.”


Human Events...

In 2010 the Michigan Live website detailed how Amash and his family were ostensibly profiting from the creation of tools in China which were then sold by the Amash family business in Michigan.

The impeachment impresario’s 2017 Financial Disclosure Report details the congressman reported between $100,001 and $1,000,000 in income from a company called Michigan Industrial Tools, which in turn is owned by Dynamic Source International, based in China. Dynamic Source International manufactures products overseas and sells them in the United States via Michigan Industrial Tools (MIT).

With the tensions between the United States and China rising in recent weeks amidst talks of trade deals and tariffs, the Amash family could take a financial hit.

A statement from the Amash campaign back in 2010 quoted Michigan Industrial Tools’ Human Resources Manager Nancy Hill who said: “We enjoy stable jobs with free health benefits at an amazing West Michigan company.”

Amash’s brother and campaign spokesman John Amash said at the time that the family’s company has staff in China who help “facilitate trade”, but stated there was no manufacturing plant. But the website of Dynamic Source International states: “We are located in Hangzhou, capital city of Zhejiang Province, we have factory facilities.”

The Amashs said the website was incorrect, but an opposition campaign in 2010 showed a picture of Amash’s family product with a sign on the back which read: “Manufactured in China for Michigan IndustrialTools.”

The Congressman’s calls for impeachment came just as Trump ratcheted up the trade war with China – a policy even establishment economists have likened to a Reagan-esque game changer.

Amash’s record on other matters is equally sketchy from a Republican perspective.

The Michigan Congressman has opposed declaring America’s border crisis a national emergency, has opposed the repeal and replace of Obamacare, and told a Young Americans for Liberty conference last year that all options were on the table in terms of replacing Trump as the GOP nominee in 2020.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

"Literally" is right up there with "garner."

UGH!

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Considering the democratic party is full-on corrupt, with its ties to their own corrupt Maddow liar media, I'd say that Biden should h=jump ship and save himself.

Come on dude - your rich son has a life raft.

buwaya said...

Lawyerly precision does not rate so highly with Cicero.
Every mode for its time and place and purpose, and to the degree that it suits the speakers qualities.

Chuck said...

cacimbo said...
Biden is leading in polls because Dem voters envision he can beat Trump. By attacking/triggering Trump too early voters get to see how poorly he looks against Trump - while they still have plenty of time to pick another nominee. Proving Trump right - Biden is dumb.


It looks like everybody is beating Trump in polling. Not just Biden.

The re-tweets of those poll results were hilarious.

"Colonoscopy 52%, Trump 42%."
"Wrecking your parents' car 50%, Trump 42%."
"Ham sandwich 58%, Trump 41%."
"Dental implants 53%, Trump 42%."
"Trapped in elevator 47%, Trump 42%."

roesch/voltaire said...

The circle of rot surrounding Trump in the swirl of cabinet members involved in ethical lapses and self indulgences is just one aspect of the threat in plain sight. Add in any of his temper tweets, the growing deficit because of the tax cuts and you begin to see why the rest of the world has figured out the con man and how to play him.k

Angle-Dyne, Samurai Buzzard said...

This is all very entertaining but there comes a point where pedantic scrutiny of rhetoric becomes an exercise in obliviousness. This is crude, stupid, hysterical stuff, an attempt at anathematizing the political views of millions of middle-of-the-road Americans in the way that has now become standard for Dems.

It's remarkable how people, who claim to be so sensitive to rhetorical crudity when delivered by Trump, can read or hear this crazy talk, day in, day out, and and accept it as "respectable" political speech, from the alleged representatives of "return to normality", or at worst standard innocuous pol bullshitting.

tim maguire said...

rhhardin said...
Literally is an intensifier. It's used to mean "so much so that it might as well be literally."

No logic prevents literally from being used figuratively, like any other word.


I disagree. Figuratively means "not literally." Using literally to mean figuratively is to render "literally" functionally meaningless. It is, as Chuck says, no longer a word, but a mere verbal tic.

A person who uses literally to mean figuratively is literally reducing the information content of the English language.

Francisco D said...

Chuckles,

How many Irish coffees so far this morning?

Clyde said...

No. Members of the Democrat party and the Deep State actors who refused to accept defeat in an election that they tried unsuccessfully to fix, and who then sought to overthrow the lawfully elected president via subterfuge using the power of the agencies of the State, are the true "existential threat" to democracy.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The democratic party and their hack liar press - are literally Hitler.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Hillary 85% chance of winning!

That's OK - Chuck is in love with the Russian-popular vote method.

Chuck said...

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...
"Literally" is right up there with "garner."

UGH!


Do you understand that Trump himself is misusing "literally" about once a week?

Google is your friend. Search Trump transcripts for "literally." Use "-Biden" to weed out all of the current news stories.

AllenS said...

Good work, EDH.

JPS said...

rhhardin,

"Literally is an intensifier. It's used to mean 'so much so that it might as well be literally.'

"No logic prevents literally from being used figuratively, like any other word."

If I'm going to surrender to this usage, I'm going to need another word that means, Not figuratively. Except when I find it, you and your ilk will tell me that that it's perfectly OK to use that one figuratively too.

In the meantime I'll keep driving to work and hearing the ad where the lady says since her last ad her office has been literally flooded with calls. Or I'll remember my old commander talking about the time when the Family Readiness Group literally imploded, and a friend's comment afterward: No. No, it didn't. That would have been on the news.

And I will of course remember that Joe Biden sides with the American people, who at the beginning of Obama's presidency "literally stood on the brink of a new depression."

Chuck said...

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...
Hillary 85% chance of winning!


Don't try that stupid game on me. National polling immediately before the election had Hillary's national vote totals at less than +4%, and she won the national vote total by about +2%. Within the margin of error.

It's a myth, that national polling was wildly wrong in 2016. The numbers are clear.

buwaya said...

The fundamental matter remains - what you have is an existential war between factions of the American people. This is a struggle of millions against millions. Both sides have very few remaining common interests and too many interests in opposition.

The focus on persons and speech is an attempt to humanize some things that may be too too large to understand, and perhaps too horrible to acknowkedge.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Chuck - so that makes it OK for Biden to literally misuse literally, literally every day of his literal life?

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Chuck -the national media had Hillary up by 10 points right before the election.

Hagar said...

The Cold War "uni-party" establishment and the campus rebels of the 1960's and early '70's are indeed threatened with extinction, but not because of Trump. They just have outlived their times, and Trump is a transitional figure while we figure out what comes next.

chuck said...

Biden doesn't believe anything, the only thing that matters is if he can entertain the crowd. Or a least me, and I am not entertained. Kudos to Trump for bringing some fun to Biden's campaign.

buwaya said...

In other words, this all is a displacement into the trivial.

It is like an argument about the relative merits of officers pistols when we are discussing the battle of Verdun.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

Biden is a dummy like Trump is a stable genius.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

And Trump sycophants keep marching to their leader’s tune.

#NotSurprised

Big Mike said...

Well, he’s an existential threat to the crazy wing of the Democrat Party, which is currently in ascendence. He certainly will support and even amplify their current fratricidal tendencies. But Biden is confusing the state of his party with the state of the nation, a common error for Democrats.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

12 days out, Hillary up 14 points! weee.

Rachel Maddow's biggest fan is here to regurgitate her deep thoughts.

cacimbo said...

@ Chuck The smug religious like belief in rigged polls by TDS sufferers is what enabled Trump to win in 2016. Comments like yours lead me to believe those with TDS are still wearing their blinders. That should make a Trump 2020 win easier.

Chuck said...

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...
Chuck -the national media had Hillary up by 10 points right before the election.


Don't fuck with me on this, sport. I am not even going to take the trouble to hyperlink this for you. Cut and paste the .url yourself:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

Last RCP average (11/1/16 to 11/7/16): Clinton +3.2
Final result: Clinton +2.1

The last Clinton +10 polling leads were in October. Where do you get the bullshit that you spew on these comments pages?

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Chuck would vote for this liar over Trump, because Trump is icky.

rhhardin said...

A person who uses literally to mean figuratively is literally reducing the information content of the English language.

Nobody uses literally to mean figuratively. They use literally figuratively.

Words don't mean one by one but in context, aside from that complaint.

JML said...

All this talk about Amash. I want to know where they stand with regards to the Amish. The Amish are literally living proof that he horse and buggy are a viable option to the automobile, leading the green revolution into the next millennium.

buwaya said...

Biden doesnt matter, for the record. He is a figurehead for a faction of the political establishment, and more so of a faction of their employers.

Biden has always been a nonentity, a name, an object. The near-opposite of an unmoved mover, with little initiative. He was chosen, as he was always chosen, for his affable nature and because he seemed unthreatening.

Trump is something else.

Henry said...

One thing that I find humorous about Biden's pocket Jeremiad is the neat way the Trump apocalypse maps to the election season. Biden wasn't running in 2016 or 2018 so he has no reason to pronounce that the end has already happened. Instead, he must insist that end is coming at the close of the polls on November 3, 2020. That is the real point of no return.

Yet, Trump is static. He is what he is. His administration is deck chairs, not Titanic. There's no velocity toward apocalypse, let alone acceleration. This train crash has already happened. It's not really moving at all.

Also funny is that "the end is near" is an old old comic trope. Biden seems blissfully unaware of the fact that he's become a New Yorker cartoon (thanks, Roz Chast).

Clyde said...

Fake polls. Yawn. With all the spammers and scammers, lots of sensible people don't even answer unfamiliar phone numbers any more. If it's important, let 'em leave a message. I wouldn't recognize a pollster's number, so they would never get any input from me. I am not the only one.

cacimbo said...

It's a myth, that national polling was wildly wrong in 2016.

Since the election is not decided based on "national" votes - that is a useless poll. Where are the polls that showed Trump winning the midwest "blue wall" ?

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

LOL Chuck - I don't need to fuck with you. You can fuck with yourself.

LOL - that link to Real Clear Politics final Nov polling data shows Hillary winning between 2% to 5%. The national media didn't even go there. They were sure she was going to clean up but good.

tim maguire said...

Chuck said...Do you understand that Trump himself is misusing "literally" about once a week?

By all means, bring that up in any of the many threads that extol Trump's careful use of words to mean what they mean. It'll be a great come-backer.

But this thread is about Biden's use of language.

Dave Begley said...

Trump is a threat to democracy because he isn't a Democrat and he won.

Can we call that what it is? Authoritarianism.

This crazy claim by Joe is just like the impeachment claims of the Dems. They scream "obstruction of justice" and it is just their opinion that has NO factual basis.

buwaya said...

Chuck is not sincere.
Neither is Inga.

Neither is a person you would want to sit down with over coffee.
No real conversation to be had there. Nothing to say about sailing ships and sealing wax and the price of tea in China.

R/V I don't know. He doesn't engage, which is not usually a good sign.

Big Mike said...

Chuck apparently doesn’t read the articles he links to. As EDH points out upthread this is the money quote from that article (emphasis mine):

“Amash acknowledged that his “brothers do own a trading company that does business in China.” However, he stated, “I don’t own it.” “

That’s the sort of mealy-mouthed crap that gives politicians the bad name they so rightly deserve.

William said...

Essence versus existence: Is it the fate of man to go bald or is baldness an ephemeral, transient state that does not define us. Biden like Sartre is an existential warrior. He seeks to create and define his own essence. There is, to be sure, something tragic about Biden's struggle with baldness, but what defines him is not his bald pate but his brave struggle against it. Perhaps if he wore a beret the look would be more flattering.

Chuck said...

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...
Chuck - so that makes it OK for Biden to literally misuse literally, literally every day of his literal life?



Literally, I have offered not one word of defense for Joe Biden on this page. I called this misuse of the language a "verbal tic" on the part of both Biden and Trump. Literally, I did that.

Figuratively, you are the embodiment of what is so stupid, and what I find so hateful about the national Trump Cult. That you presume that that any criticism of Trump signifies endorsement of the Left and Democrats.

Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy did it with Rep. Justin Amash. McCarthy responded to Amash's impeachment comments by literally claiming that Amash voted with Pelosi more than with McCarthy. Which is literally untrue. Amash has a better conservative voting record than most Republicans, and by some tests he has a better conservative voting record than McCarthy. Rep. Amash clearly votes with McCarthy more than with Pelosi. It was a stupid statement by McCarthy.

traditionalguy said...

To exist or not to exist, that is Biden's question. Whether tis nobler in mind to suffer the tweet slings and branding arrows of an outrageous leader Making America Great Again. Or to take CIA/FBI/NSA arms of hoax crimes against a sea of deplorable Americans and try to escape from the appointed destruction of the Obama/Clinton plot to destroy America?

Dave Begley said...

It didn't make it over to Iowa yesterday. From what I can see, no questions were taken by King Joe. Looks like he is running the same type of coronation campaign that Crooked Hillary ran and lost.

What an idiot loser. Trump in a landslide.

Sebastian said...

Trump has given us a stronger economy, a strong challenge to China, and a strong effort to stem the southern invasion. That is an "existential threat" only to pro-socialist, pro-Chinese, and pro-illegal Democrats.

Greg Hlatky said...

Bet Joe spent the previous day practicing saying "existential".

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Marx had to manipulate the data to force it all thru.

Giovan Pietro Bellori said...

How’s the political legacy of Chuck’s heroes Churchill, Buckley, Will and Amash looking?

None of those guys could get arrested. Well, Churchill could, he said mean things about Islam in the River War.

Of course Chuck loves open-borders shit like Will. Open borders for you, not Will, who lives in 85% white Chevy Chase.

tim maguire said...

Chuck said...Figuratively, you are the embodiment of what is so stupid, and what I find so hateful about the national Trump Cult. That you presume that that any criticism of Trump signifies endorsement of the Left and Democrats.

No, that doesn't quite capture it, does it? It's not that any criticism of Trump counts as an endorsement of the Left, but that the insistence on turning every criticism of the Left into a criticism of Trump suggests an effort to paper over the faults of the left. Which does signify endorsement, or at least preference.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Chuck - The topic isn't Trump, It's Biden.

We note the Trump-hater-obsession cult cannot abide.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“Neither is Inga.

Neither is a person you would want to sit down with over coffee.
No real conversation to be had there. Nothing to say about sailing ships and sealing wax and the price of tea in China.”

Oh please. Everything I say here is sincere. I sincerely think Buwaya is a foreigner who doesn’t understand Americans and uses this forum to bash America and the dummies here eat it up, just like they eat up Trump’s bullshit. You people should be embarrassed, maybe one day some of you will. I wouldn’t sit down over coffee with Trump sycophants. Why would I do that to myself?

Chris N said...

While it’s entirely common to disagree more passionately with people more like than unlike, if the dispute favors the political opposition to gain publicly, is it better to keep it in house or air it publicly?

Trump has stepped into the role of representing ‘working’ Americans, partly due to his experience in construction, and partly opportunistically for all the people who wouldn’t talk about sovereignty, immigration jobs and borders. Results mixed, as I see things. Deep problems.

He’s weirdly personal, melodramatic, Self-serving and tabloid when it comes to style, which I think does a lot of harm to civility, despite the Left’s destruction of all things civil. He doesn’t pass my trust test in terms of business partner and ethics, but I could be wrong.

But he also grows the economy, exposes establishment rot, takes advantage of opposition party disarray, lack of ideas and hysteria and actively takes all the heat. He talks about sovereignty, immigration jobs and borders. He’s also the President,

As for Chuck, you have opposing viewpoints, fine, some seem pretty good, but you monomaniacally blame Trump for this establishment destruction like so many who would tear down any establishment. And when challenged and/or attacked, fairly or unfairly, you act like a huge pussy. Stop acting like a huge pussy and find areas of agreement, too, would be my advice.

Oh yeah, and stop acting like such a huge pussy. I’m still not convinced you aren’t a bot or a bot/troll hybrid.

Giovan Pietro Bellori said...

Chevy Chase isn’t quite as white as where dingbat Becky Inga lives—few
places are.

Beasts of England said...

"Hillary 85% chance of winning!"

Of the many joyous moments in the 2016 election, watching the NYT's 'probability needle' move throughout the evening from Clinton at 85% (or higher) to Trump at 99% was delicious!!

gilbar said...

What, if anything, do you think Biden is trying to say when he calls Trump an "existential threat"? Underscored with "literally," it should mean that, with Trump, there's a danger that America will cease to exist.

add to Beta O'Rourke saying... Impeach Now "Or Lose Our Democracy Forever"

And it seems clear to me. Democrats are saying: Remove Trump, by any means necessary
Including Assassination, i can only assume.

Chuck said...

Big Mike: Here is who else "does business" in China:

Buick
Jeep
Boeing
Harley-Davidson
TaylorMade Golf
Apple
Nike
Starbucks
Texas Instruments
Abbott Laboratories

And while only about 10% of the Amash family business involves manufacture in China, only about 15% of the products for sale in the Trump Organization catalog of Trump-branded knickknacks are made in the U.S.A.

Dave Begley said...

The only Dem candidate that I can take halfway seriously is Tim Ryan.

Dave Begley said...

Chuck:

The Chinese bribed Biden via his coke using son Hunter. The hedge fund business model is 2/20. What's 2% of $1.5b?

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

9 out of 10 Marxists agree - Trump is nuts and he should be locked up.

Tommy Duncan said...

I see someone pissed in Chuck's Wheaties this morning. He's in top form today. Don't fuck with Chuck!

EDH said...

Dave Begley said...
This crazy claim by Joe is just like the impeachment claims of the Dems. They scream "obstruction of justice" and it is just their opinion that has NO factual basis.

And no legal basis.

This exchange between Alan Dershowitz and Sol Wisenberg about the history of "obstruction of justice" in the historical context of Watergate (Cox's firing) and Iran-Contra (Weinberger's pardon) on Igraham last night was eye-opening.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Beasts of England said

"Of the many joyous moments in the 2016 election, watching the NYT's 'probability needle' move throughout the evening from Clinton at 85% (or higher) to Trump at 99% was delicious!!"

Indeed!

Molly said...

In political discourse certain words gain currency or popularity for a period. Remember "gravitas"? And the WSJ columnist who began to use the word "kerfuffle", and suddenly we could see it everywhere. Somebody started saying the anthropogenic climate change was an "existential threat," by which he/she/they meant: "climate change threatens the survival of humankind." I doubt if there is any science to back this up, but it serves the rhetorical purpose of implying that climate change is a really really really serious problem, and those who refuse to endorse the adoption of laws that would punish rich people by restricting their consumption are either intellectual lightweights or are so selfish that they don't care if their consumption dooms humankind. But now the phrase "existential threat" has come to be adopted in many situations where the speaker wants to sound serious and wants to imply that any opposition to the speaker's point of view is motivated by stupidity or selfishness. The phrase can only be used by those on the left against those not on the left; so one cannot say "the impeachment efforts are an existential threat to the Constitution."

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Labor is cheap in China. That's why the Chamber of Commerce wants to flood America with illegals.

narciso said...

Bidens kin was buying into the Chinese state avionics company and they in turn were buying into a major parts supplier also a Russian controlled ukrainiam oil company with his coked up son on the board, go with that chuck

Chuck said...

Dave Begley said...
The only Dem candidate that I can take halfway seriously is Tim Ryan.


So you got that goin' for you. Which is nice.

rehajm said...

watching the NYT's 'probability needle' move throughout the evening from Clinton at 85% (or higher) to Trump at 99% was delicious!!"

It was. I want that feeling again. NYT will certainly oblige with that first part...

Swede said...

Biden said that?

Who'd he steal that line from?

narciso said...

Bidens kin was buying into the Chinese state avionics company and they in turn were buying into a major parts supplier also a Russian controlled ukrainiam oil company with his coked up son on the board, go with that chuck

narciso said...

I missed your update dave.

rehajm said...

"Or Lose Our Democracy Forever"

I took that to mean the Democrat Party splinters up into smaller groups along the spectrum of crazy.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

It Started With a Lie: Bruce Ohr's Linchpin Role in Russiagate

narciso said...

From the American thinker piece, the dems have been playing these soecial prosecutor games back in Watergate with experte communications suppressing of evidence et al.

Angle-Dyne, Samurai Buzzard said...

buwaya: The focus on persons and speech is an attempt to humanize some things that may be too too large to understand, and perhaps too horrible to acknowkedge.
[...]
In other words, this all is a displacement into the trivial.


Speech and the tools using the speech are of interest to those oblivious members of the two factions who still think that all it will take to make America America again is the correct procedural fiddling. (That is, Morning in America America, or Eternal-Return-1960s America, depending on factional preference.)

Fernandistein said...

Email Nixes Tits

Easiest Lit Minx

Michael K said...

If you think of the Democrats as a very large organized crime ring that uses politics as a means to their ends, it all makes sense.

This is the real issue. How did all these politicians get rich in office ? They have had no careers in the private sector. Nancy Pelosi did not come from honest money. Her father was Mayor of Baltimore.

Roll Call said Pelosi's earnings are connected to her husband's heavy investments in stocks that include "Apple, Comcast, Facebook, Shutterfly and Walt Disney"

Investments in those stocks sound like what rich people do, not how they make their money.

Big Mike said...

@Chuck, I have no idea why you think your comment at 8:25 is in any way responsive to my remarks. I used to own Buicks, but they started falling apart about 80,000 miles. GM needs to ask Subaru how to build a car that goes to 200,000. I replaced my Outback with a Mustang, which probably won’t get 200,000 miles, but I am in my 70s so I won’t either.

narciso said...

Then in the subprime scandal Obama and Biden received the lionshare of contributions from the offending companies.

narciso said...

That's why neither holder nor Mary jo white went after any of the major players like ciunyrywide, they went after the recovery team at AIG though.

Tommy Duncan said...

2020 #MI03 Republican Primary:
Jim Lower 49% (+16)
Justin Amash 33%

Practical Political Consulting 6/5-9

narciso said...

Countrywide, they did some perfunctory jab at Paulson, whites lieutenant was khuzaimi fmrly of Deutsch bank most recently putting the screws to Cohen, compare and contrast

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

LOL - Glacier National Park quietly removes Obama era sign that say glaciers will be gone by 2020.

Literally gone!

gilbar said...

oh! Oh! I got it I GOT IT!
i too wondered about "existential threat", and what it means; so...
i looked up Existentialism on Wikipedia, and found that:

Existentialists oppose definitions of human beings as primarily rational
SO, you see? Existentialism is opposed to Rationalism....

So, when a politician says something is an "existential threat", they are saying: BY DEFINITION
That it is an Irrational Threat. Literally!

gilbar said...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialism#Opposition_to_positivism_and_rationalism

Ken B said...

“Vote for me or die.”

Michael K said...

It's a little interesting to see Chuck so exercised this morning. I don't read his trash, of course, but he does seem excited.

Over at Ricochet the number of Never Trumpers seems to be down to two left. I quit a year ago after I was "suspended" for two days for using the term "TDS." Not now. I looked at the post to see the comments. It was a TDS guy there who was pushing a podcast by some minor fiction writer who has TDS. One commenter seemed still infected.

I think Biden is still trying to reach the non-crazy Democrats and so far it worked but his polls dropped after his flip on the Hyde Amendment. His Trump hate is probably an attempt to get back to the sweet spot of Dem voters. It's all signaling and there is no real policy in any of this.

Francisco D said...

And while only about 10% of the Amash family business involves manufacture in China, only about 15% of the products for sale in the Trump Organization catalog of Trump-branded knickknacks are made in the U.S.A.

Chuckles is either pulling those numbers out of his butt or he is involved with a Democrat oppo research group.

How surprising for a LLR.

Angle-Dyne, Samurai Buzzard said...

Chris N: "Self-serving and tabloid when it comes to style, which I think does a lot of harm to civility, despite the Left’s destruction of all things civil."

Making the rubble bounce harms the rubble?

[to Chuck]: "Oh yeah, and stop acting like such a huge pussy."

If shaming Chuck for being a huge pussy worked he'd have butched up by now.

MadisonMan said...

Vote for me or die.

Yes. Coming soon: Joe Biden saying "Vote for me or I'll Shoot this dog"

narciso said...

Bidens been lying since he blamed the driver for his first wife's accident, imagine the gall of that, then the plagiarism and the nuclear freeze movement, two coked up off spring, one runs a criminal justice related non profit, and he isnt pelted with rocks.

traditionalguy said...

FTR: The word existential has morphed away from Sartre et al. and is being used to refer to survival. And of course Trump is the one guarding the USA's survival by guarding our founding Bill of Rights. Obama and mini me Biden are international criminal agents, and proud of what they did. They are the ones Hillary screamed would all hang if Trump were to win.

TreeJoe said...

Interesting to watch Trump work to pick his opponent.

He's giving Biden air time because he sees him as best to face off against.

Biden is older, white, has troubling history with women, family corruption issues, and has a long history of taking positions similar to Trump's. I can see why Biden is desired.

Ken B said...

Someone asked what AA meant about the cockroaches. She meant sloppy factual errors. She no longer trusts WaPo reporting.

People discuss literally. Saying Trump is an existential threat is a prima facie figurative use of existential . Saying “literally” should mean that you are making a claim that is not figurative in this case. Example: It is rhetorical to say Obama was un-American, unless you were a birther, making a particular claim that would be obscured by the figurative usage.

narciso said...

Biden is right in his narrow paste eating ways to these institutions like the telephone game called the intelligence community to the hive of lobbyists he is a threat.

buwaya said...

Narciso, yes they did go after the "meat" of AIG, not the wild and crazy guys at the London CDS operation or Joe Cassano. Cassano got away with hundreds of millions after a pro-forma investigation by the DOJ.

Hagar said...

Joe Biden is a "Tammany brave"; a follower, not a leader.

Angle-Dyne, Samurai Buzzard said...

Francisco D to Chuck: "And while only about 10% of the Amash family business involves manufacture in China, only about 15% of the products for sale in the Trump Organization catalog of Trump-branded knickknacks are made in the U.S.A."

Chuckles is either pulling those numbers out of his butt or he is involved with a Democrat oppo research group.


The numbers seem plausible to me, but are neither here nor there. Businesses must respond to existing conditions. There is nothing inherently "hypocritical" about a businessman stating a preference for wanting to manufacture in or source from the U.S., but having to offshore to remain competitive, nothing "hypocritical" about campaigning to change the status quo, while having to respond to trade laws/incentives, etc. as they are right now.

It's a brainless "gotcha" of the kind that impresses social media morons.

narciso said...

It's a little known secret, it seems the only transgressive thing is the truth, of course it was the slithy tove Spitzer who forced hank Greenberg out letting cassano run the table like fletcher christian

Hagar said...

Trump is not "a threat to democracy in America," or anywhere else.
Note that his tweets and public statements are all about coping with today's problems; nowhere does he claim to be leading a movement towards a glorious future, or anything like it.

Chuck said...

Big Mike said...
@Chuck, I have no idea why you think your comment at 8:25 is in any way responsive to my remarks. I used to own Buicks, but they started falling apart about 80,000 miles. GM needs to ask Subaru how to build a car that goes to 200,000. I replaced my Outback with a Mustang, which probably won’t get 200,000 miles, but I am in my 70s so I won’t either.


I have no idea why you think that the above comment is responsive to anything. I don't care about the cars you owned. I don't care how old you are, or anything else about you.

You got that? I'm just not that into you.

And who said anything pro or con about product quality? I didn't, but it sure sounds like you are defending the quality of Asian-manufactured products over equivalent products made in the U.S. by U.S. companies. So are American component manufacturers right to do what you did, and source their manufacturing from the "Subaru" of whatever business they are in?

I picked out a list of great American brands, who do significant business in China. Because the Trump Cultists wanted to criminalize Justin Amash for being the part-owner of a family business that does about 10% of its manufacturing business in China.

Are you fuckheads so self-unaware that you don't remember Donald and Ivanka Trump's self-defensive comments about their brands selling stuff made in China?

"There are 268 items for sale on the Trump Organization’s online store. Of those, 41 are made in the USA and listed in a separate section highlighting US goods. That means American products make up exactly 15.298507462686567% of the Trump Store’s available merchandise."

Nobody said...

You people should be embarrassed - Inga

“Keep hope alive!” - Inga taunting Trump supporters before the 2016 election.
“Nobody knows what Mueller knows!” - Inga before the Mueller report was released.

That’s pretty rich.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

If an individual is an existential threat to the nation then the morally correct action for anyone would be to eliminate that threat, up to and including by killing the person. What's one murder against the very survival of the nation?!

Eliminationist rhetoric: it's just fine when the Left does it.

Angle-Dyne, Samurai Buzzard said...

Re my comment @9:08, I think you could make a much better case for "hypocrisy" re Trump's use of legal foreign labor at his hotels and resorts.

narciso said...

Btw David neiwert the one who touted that 'eliminationist rhetoric' got banned by twitter.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Note: this isn't all that far from what Principled TrueConservative Bulwark types said when they urged people to vote for Hillary; the line was something like "the nation can survive a President Hillary but might not survive the cataclysm that would be President Trump." Nuclear war threats were bandied about--that the good stuff.

They did this, of course, while simultaneously mocking the Michael Anton "Flight 93 Election" rhetoric!

pacwest said...

I think Biden's best strategy in the primaries is to run against Trump rather than get involved in the back and forth in the debates. The sole purpose of the Dems is to get Trump out. The rest, including policy, is incidental. See if I am right by how many times Biden iterates his anti-Trumpness in the first debate.

narciso said...

Trump is a little like palmerston who waged the war against China, maybe with rough means

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Remember, Chucks self-described mission is to sow dissent and smear Trump, Not to honestly engage on the facts. Clown nose ON in other words. Taranto revived kerfuffle all right. This thread is one.

Phil said...

The national polls were and are a red herring, and any "student of political science" knows that. The state polls were also largely wrong, and nearly all in the same direction - in favor of Hillary - and they got MI, PA, WI, completely wrong, and missed badly enough in FL and NC.

Anyone defending the '16 polling is a fool or a liar, take your pick.

henge2243 said...

Let's be clear, anyone who uses the word "literally" is a jack-ass.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Chuck said...Althouse, you've got a tag for "Trump rhetoric." Perusing posts with that tag, I had trouble finding a single one where you took the tagged occasion to criticize or ridicule anything that Trump has said. My own vague recollection is that in the history of that tag, there may have been just once or twice that you were critical of Trump. Do you disagree?

Blogger's free--why not start your own instead of whining about what someone else chooses to cover and say on theirs?

Nobody said...

So I dropped in to see examples of Amash’s Churchillian rhetoric, where not just the the lineaments of the case for impeachment were illuminated by the brilliant clarity of his words, but the sinew of logic and the muscle of evidence would also be exposed as in an x-ray by his magisterial intellect, and to top if off I was hoping for a murderer’s row of the Trump supporters’ best argument, each mercifully dispatched by a coup de grace of trenchant insight.

Instead I get quibbles that buying stuff from factories in China and importing them to supplant American manufacturing doesn’t count if he doesn’t actually OWN the factories that produce the stuff.

I admit that the above was a tall order, how about just a Tweet or two from Abash that lays out the case for impeachment in clear and unambiguous terms?

narciso said...

Well it's a short drive:

https://accordingtohoyt.com/2019/06/07/unfreedom-of-the-press-pt-1-or-how-to-drive-the-mainstream-media-insane-in-a-few-easy-steps-by-amanda-s-green/

Ray - SoCal said...

Trump is the first President to do regulatory reform. It’s not a vote getter or an area that gets a lot of donations. Both the usual Democrats and Republicans just keep on adding onto the regulatory state. I see it as more rent seeking / donation opportunities.

Trump’s retire 2 regulations for every new one is amazing, and under the radar of the electorate, and ignored by the msm.

I wish there was more coverage of this. My feeling is the current coverage is similar to an iceberg, where you only see the tip of it.

tcrosse said...

The sole purpose of the Dems is to get Trump out. The rest, including policy, is incidental. See if I am right by how many times Biden iterates his anti-Trumpness in the first debate.

Hillary's campaign was short on policy and long on how icky Trump was. Maybe it will work for Biden.



Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

He can’t, Nobody. We all know he can’t. Which is why he’s resorted to saying stupid shit like “are you fuckheads so...” etc.

Brian said...

Chuck said:
Because my contention is that under ANY Republican president, we would have gotten Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh

Not Kavenaugh. A Republican President like McCain would have pulled Kavenaugh's nomination after accusations of rape surfaced.

RNB said...

Biden had no idea what those words he spoke mean. Like many people nowadays, he could not give you even a horseback definition of most of the words he speaks. He just knows that he's seen those words in close proximity to each other in things other people said, so he sticks them together, too.

Nobody said...

As to Trump’s business dealings in China, is there any evidence he is carving out to protect them, as Pelosi regularly did with her husband’s interests?

Like the old saying says, “A new broom sweeps clean, but an old broom knows where the dirt is."

Nobody said...

Hillary's campaign was short on policy and long on how icky Trump was.

Anybody who had kids in the ‘90s got a belly laugh out of “The children are watching” ads.

Infinite Monkeys said...

Biden is trying to imitate the way he thinks intelligent people talk. It will impress those as dim or dimmer than he. Of those that are smarter, some will just say, "that's Joe being Joe". It will only annoy the people who weren't inclined to support him anyway.

Michael in ArchDen said...

People who mis-use "literally" to mean figuratively, figuratively make me crazy.

Michael said...

If Trump is re-elected he will prevent today's Progressives from "forever and fundamentally altering the character" of the country - which is why it is essential that he is.

Infinite Monkeys said...

Blogger's free--why not start your own instead

Exactly. Do a "dumb things Trump did/said today" blog. That's an untapped market.

Martin said...

imho, Trump looks afraid of Biden. His personal taunts usually have an element of humor or irony or an unexpected angle, but not in this case.

Fen said...

Inga: Why would I do that to myself?

That's a hysterical line, seeing as you've just returned from sabbatical, after getting your head handed to you re the nothing-burger of the Mueller report. You spent that time away crafting a new narrative of this Trump Hell you live your alternate life in, to memory hole all the silly things you said, to pretend you didn't make an utter fool of yourself. And now you are back here again, posing under this new illusion you cling to, praying that we don't dispel it and send you back to face your mirror.

And you ask "why would I do that to myself?"

Bwahahahaha!

Thank you for the entertainment.

Nobody said...

Yeah, that’s the ticket, Trump’s afraid of BIden!

Nobody said...

I think you could use “literally” figuratively, and “existential” figuratively, but both is a kind of rhetorical overkill. It reminds me of the Joker’s line in that movie: “Was that over the top? I can never tell."

gilbar said...

henge2243 said...
Let's be clear, anyone who uses the word "literally" is LITERALLY a jack-ass.

fify! :)

Big Mike said...

One should consider the possibility that Biden, who is half as bright as a box of nails, doesn’t know the difference between “literally” and “figuratively.” I also rather doubt that “existential” is a normal part of his vocabulary.

Fen said...

Chuck: I have no idea I don't care I don't care I'm just not-.

"But enough about me. Let's talk more about me!"

I thought you gave your word that you would go away? Principles? What happened to them?

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Get new glasses, Martin. You're seeing Trump bring attention to Biden in a way that sucks the oxygen from the other 236 Dems running. This is exactly what the DNC-Media complex did to Trump vis-a-vis the seven dwarves in 2016. Except they now say they unwittingly helped elect Trump. Trump is wittingly doing it, and toying with Slow Joe like a cat with a mouse. Before literally killing it in the Electoral ColLege.

Brian said...

[Trump picking his opponent....] Biden is older, white, has troubling history with women, family corruption issues, and has a long history of taking positions similar to Trump's. I can see why Biden is desired.

It is curious what opponent Trump would least like to face. My guess is that Kamala is the current least favorite simply because Trump doesn't mention her name. Or maybe he thinks shes so low it doesn't warrant mentioning her name.

He talks about Biden, he talks about Sanders, he talks about Warren, he talks about boot-Edge-Edge.

I think his strategy at this point is to start the campaign now. He'll run against the top DNC candidate, whoever it is, at that point in time. Biden's the current top of the polls? Great, plan campaign events in the same state Biden is in at the time.

Allows him to A-B test messaging against the current front runner, while also beating them down, drawing out the DNC process. When Sanders takes the lead, attack him. Repeat as necessary.

It was surprising to see how surprised CNN was that Trump was campaigning in Iowa at the same time Biden was. I expected nothing less.

Chuck said...

Fen said...
Chuck: I have no idea I don't care I don't care I'm just not-.

"But enough about me. Let's talk more about me!"

I thought you gave your word that you would go away? Principles? What happened to them?


Fuck off. The very first comment on this page, with obviously nothing yet having been posted by me, was about me and referring to me by name.

Fen said...

I think you could use “literally” figuratively, and “existential” figuratively, but both is a kind of rhetorical overkill.

Yah, whenever someone loads up their assertion with adjectives it's a tell that even they don't believe what they are saying.

The basic sentence is: "Trump is a threat to America." But that just sounds boring since Democrats have turned everything up to 11 for the last 3 years.

Howard said...

You people need to buy a new horse to beat

Nonapod said...

I've now heard several media figures, political hacks, and commenters make the claim that Trump must be afraid of Biden based on his attacks. That's not the inference I'm making. It seems to me that if he were indeed "afraid of Biden" he would attack whomever is trailing him more vigorously and ignore Biden. He wouldn't want to draw attention to Biden with his undeniably powerful attention getting abilities. He wouldn't want to elevate Biden by singling out him out.

To me, it seems far more likely Trump is spoiling for a fight. He's wants a specific target and he's tired of the amorphous mass that is the ridiculously huge field of Dem candidates. He likes agitating, trash talking, and insulting a specific target. He actually enjoys it more than almost anything else about the bizarre job of President of the United.

But these are all just guesses. I'm not a mind reader.

Fen said...

Chuck: The very first comment on this page, with obviously nothing yet having been posted by me, was about me and referring to me by name.

Yes, you have a very bad reputation, which you have earned. You are regarded as a Moby and a Traitor, and no one wants you here, except to throw rocks at you. But you want to talk about Chuck, so here I am:

I thought you gave your word that you would go away? Principles? What happened to them?

Fen said...

Howard: You people need to buy a new horse to beat

Dude, you're standing on a 10ft pile of rocks after painting "Fuck Conservatives" on every single one of them. LOL.

narayanan said...

buwaya said...

Chuck is not sincere.
Neither is Inga.

What is with Chuck on Lawyerly precision ?

Does he wear Judge Robes and bang a gavel as he posts and reads.

and keeps telling "the Jury will disregard that"

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

is this why they made us read "Politics and the English Language" in skool?

Nobody said...

Chuck is mad that the Republican Party has shifted left as the promises of free trade with dishonest partners, and rhetoric regarding the nobility of foreign wars has crumbled to ashes. Give me a guy who doesn’t want to depose dictators and who stands up for American workers any day of the week.

Howard said...

Fen: Sure, but you fuckers aren't dead yet

narayanan said...

"The president is literally an existential threat to America," said Joe Biden."

There is parsing (shallow) and there is parsing (deep and probing and full of angst despair and disgust as required by Existentialism)

"The president is literally an existential threat to America - that I would be comfortably confident about ripping off - FIFY ," said Joe Biden."

narciso said...

Here's a mystery:

https://dailycaller.com/2019/04/15/valerie-jarrett-book-tucker/

Michael K said...

Has anyone seen Howard and Chuck in the same place at the same time ?

Hmmmm.

iowan2 said...

Blogger's free--why not start your own instead of whining about what someone else chooses to cover and say on theirs?ds

Yes been asked, and ignored many times.

I took a moment to consider why he is obsessed with our host. Constantly telling her what to examine, questioning her preferences. Demanding something get equal treatment,like today.
Then it hit me. He considers himself a peer. Hilarious right? A per to a Con-Law Prof, that runs a top Blog, that has amassed a cast of commenters that weigh in with intelligence, and decades of experience on a range of topics that is stunning.
And he considers him self a peer, with some sort of respect owed him, that would catch our hosts attention enough to pay attention to his musings.

A peer, geesh.

Chuck said...

Fen said...
Chuck: I have no idea I don't care I don't care I'm just not-.

"But enough about me. Let's talk more about me!"

I thought you gave your word that you would go away? Principles? What happened to them?


I never wrote any such thing.

Just like I never originated the phrase "titty twister." (Full Moon did that.)

Just like I never wrote a word of praise for Hillary or any other Democrat. (I took Dick Durbin's side once -- on whether Trump used the phrase "shithole countries." And I took Richard Blumenthal's side once -- on what then-Judge Gorsuch said to him about Trump's trashtalking of federal judges. Later confirmed by Gorsuch.)

Just like I never made a racist comment about Ben Carson. I ridiculed Trump's view of the Department of Housing and Urban Development as "the Department of Black People."

Not Sure said...

Blogger Chuck said...
BleachBit-and-Hammers said...
Hillary 85% chance of winning!


Don't try that stupid game on me. National polling immediately before the election had Hillary's national vote totals at less than +4%, and she won the national vote total by about +2%. Within the margin of error.


This reply to BB&H's comment lacks lawyerly precision, confusing as it does "share of votes" and "probability of winning." For example, a random sample that yielded a 52-48 difference in predicted vote shares with a 3% "margin of error" would imply nearly an 87% chance that the candidate with 52% had a true share greater than 50%.

But that simple calculation neglects the fact that the distribution of votes by state is critical in US election system. For that heavy lifting, we can see what Nate Silver's estimate of Hillary's likelihood of winning was over the course of the campaign. As of Election Day, that estimate was 71%, down from its most recent peak of 88% on October 17.

Executive Summary for the busy lawyer: There's nothing "stupid" at all in BB&H's comment.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 248   Newer› Newest»