Friday, January 7, 2022

Biden takes the gloves off, finally. Did he just kill off bi-partisanship?

 On January 6, 2022, Joe Biden took off his gloves and called out Trump's lies for what they were:" a dagger at the throat of democracy."  Trump, as Biden called him, was a loser. His lies about the results of the 2020 election were just that, lies, designed to soothe Trump's narcissistic ego to paint himself as a winner. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGUptvDAVQI

 This January 6 Biden speech approach was not aimed at winning friends in the Trump camp and the message and delivery were direct, raw, and aggressive.. Why Joe Biden's intense Jan. 6 riot anniversary speech was stunning TV (usatoday.com) So why?  Did he just kill off bi-partisanship?

Making the defense of democracy a motivation for those not in the Trump camp to turn out in the midterms had not gained much traction in the polls. Depending on painfully long bipartisan negotiation was making him look weak and old and hardly inspiring.  This speech was aimed to turn this malaise around.  My favorite childhood story was Ferdinand the Bull who preferred to smell the flowers until he was stung by a bee.  This was Biden's awakened fighting bull speech. His sinking polls stung and the 2022 midterms were just too close.

There is another childhood favorite tale. CallingTrump a loser and the salesman of  The Big Lie, that there was widespread fraud in November. 2020 was also Biden's  "the Emperor has no clothes"/moment.  It is about time Biden stopped pussy footing around, making vague and political science arguments on behalf of democracy,  and name the Emperor's nakedness as what it was. Trump was out to defy the Constitution and the rule of law in order to get a second term. 

The only olive branch of bipartisanship Biden extended to the Trump camp was he would still work with them on legislation in Congress and would "reach across the aisle".  In any case, this approach is a gamble, and assumes the GOP block will not budge anyway. without more effective pressure, if ever.   On one hand, Biden's attack on Trump himself would serve to harden the  Trump core legislators representing already Trump territory. But in purple states, the swing voters would be made more aware of their general election candidate positions and to whom those running for office pledged allegiance. This nod to bi-partisanship was mostly just fine words because the Democrat's strategy has already become hardball,   naming a date by which votes will be taken on Biden's agenda,  up or down,  win or lose.  It was a veiled threat to those opposing voting rights,  child tax credits,  and other popular provisions of the Build Back Better bills. It would get "no" votes on the record and make it easier for opposing  Democrat candidates to attack them in sound bite ads in the general election. The purpose of this hardball approach was also more likely geared to put pressure on the two Democrat Senators in Name Only, Machin, and Sinema, to stop their stonewalling any degree of filibuster reform.  This reform is necessary to enable the passage of pro-democracy voting rights legislation in the Senate with a simple majority vote and not by a super majority of 60.  Killing voter rights legislation is in the interest of the GOP party loyalists who are trying to rig the system so they as a minority party can continue their rule over the majority wherever they can by gerrymandering, putting their partisans in charge of vote administration, passing laws that let the state legislature overturn popular will, and making it more difficult for certain blocks of voters with a record of favoring Democrats to vote.  Bipartisanship was probably long dead on this issue, anyway. 


The 5-Minute Fix: What does ‘voting rights’ mean anyway? - feliciamuftic@gmail.com - Gmail (google.com)

Update January 14, 2022 Lhttps://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/589462-ohio-supreme-court-strikes-down-gop-drawn-state-house-senate-maps




No comments:

Post a Comment