I just have this image of two old suits in an infantile tug–of–war with a dark–complected rag doll...

Jinnistan wrote:

See what you make me do, America!
 

Yep, definitely picked the wrong week. 

Rampop II wrote:

I'm glad to see that part of today's post–debate public discourse is addressing our long–outmoded tradition of excessive emphasis on candidates' debate skills, as opposed to their actual job qualifications. One mainstream headline even led with the fact that viewers were forced to acknowledge that liars can win debates even when the truth is on the opponent's side.

The reactions have been interesting.  Laandsey Graham went on CNN and actually thanked them for not fact-checking.  He then repeated Trump's threat to throw them all in jail for calling Trump a "felon".  Dog Burgerham (I'm not spell-checking that) just shrugged and said it's not like Trump told any lies that he hasn't already been telling.  (He's a VP frontrunner.)

I do have to call 'trash' on another CNN personality, Brian Selter, who responded to the suggestion that CNN could have provided a real-time fact check by airing the CNN fact checker's real-time tweets at the bottom of the screen by saying that this would be too distracting.  Oh, like what?  Some kind of chyron or something?  These people with the cheese....

I still like Biden, but I'm not going to lie to you.  It's not getting better.

Biden's attempt at damage control from the pitiful debate performance was also dismal in a number of similar ways.  Biden managed not to dodder off too much, and for the most part remained grammatically coherent.  But the underlying issue (being old as Sam Hell) was compounded in other ways, none of them very flattering.  We might start with his claim that he's perfectly fine until 8 o'clock in the PM.  Right, like a terminally old man, we got it.  Or his apparent confusion over the reason for his poor performance: blaming it on a cold - but he never bothered to see a doctor (ftr, Biden has doctors on-site at his pleasure), blaming it on being tired from travel - although he just spent a week off at Camp David prior; blaming it on Trump's "shouting" when his microphone was silenced as being a distraction when Biden was speaking - despite the fact that the debate was aired split-screen and we can clearly see that this did not happen.

Biden also remains observably in denial over some obvious facts.  He refuses to accept his drop in the polls (as in all of them) since the debate, despite interviewer Stephanopolous insisting on their credibility and consistency.  (Most alarmingly may be the Democrat's own internal poll from OpenLabs.)  When asked if he bothered to watch the video of the debate, to maybe understand where to improve, Biden says "I don’t think I did, no".  (Is it more disturbing that he won't bother, or that he can't even remember if he did?)  He's in denial about the amount of hesitation among his fellow Democrats or talk about being replaced.  In other words, he sounded exactly like a proud, stubborn old man. 

And like Hillary, he's deep in denial about Trump's prospects of victory.  Joe is still under the 2016 assumption that simply exposing Trump as a "congenital" "pathological" liar will be sufficient to beat him in an election.  Joe still hasn't learned the sad and unfortunate fact of our current American society that tens of millions of Americans like the fact that Trump is full of shit.  They admire him for the balls.  Or at the very least, on either margin, they're too crazy/dumb to tell the difference or they're too chicken-shit to call him out.  But regardless of motive, Trump absolutely can win, and Biden can talk like a retiring coach all he wants, but this isn't Field of Dreams anymore.

Finally, perhaps the most damning denial, and the one truly fatal red flag imo, he refuses to undergo an "independent medical evaluation" for neurological and cognitive abilities.  He's like Grandpa who everyone knows is sick but he maintains he "don't need no damn doctors poking and probing".  I'm starting to be impressed that he hasn't been accusing Kamala of stealing his snacks when he's sleeping.  And this final omen of arrogant grace: "The Lord Almighty’s not comin’ down".  Joe?  That Lord Almighty is hovering pretty close over your shoulders, dude.  It's almost like you were the proverbial 9-year-old girl with fragrant hair, if you will.  Death is sniffing, my friend.

Ultimately, this is what this 22 minute interview amounted to - Grandpa being too proud and arrogant to admit that he needs a nursing home.  We wanted to be assured of Biden's fitness for office, and what he offered instead was optimistic pablum delivered in that soothing but patronizing tone that we hear when Grandpa promises us that he's going to beat that cancer once and for all.  In real life, we don't believe it, but we want to make him think we might just to keep him happy.  Every single one of his answers were based on nothing outside of his own faith and self-assessment, as if it were his confidence that anyone doubted.

"I don’t think there’s anybody more qualified to be president or win this race than me."

"I convinced myself of two things: I’m the most qualified person to beat him, and I know how to get things done."

"I don’t buy that."  (On his poll numbers)

"I'm still in good shape."

"I believe so." (On having the mental capacity for the presidency)  "I wouldn’t be running if I didn’t think I did.  I’m running again because I think I understand best what has to be done to take this nation to a completely new level. We’re on our way. We’re on our way."  (The way of the future, the way of the future...)

And that's all fine for what he thinks, unless of course there's some cognitive issues that a medical exam might show.  I swear to Lord Almighty, if he keeps refusing to take those tests, why shouldn't we replace him?
 

So what is even the way forward? There is nothing I see that should make anyone comfortable that Biden can win this at this point. Sure, maybe all the polling is wrong. It's definitely possible. And sure, maybe the debate didn't hurt him as much as it could have. But there are a lot of 'what if's' we have to rely on for any sense of a positive outcome, where as all of the data we currently have at our hands is in Trump's favour. All of the wind is currently in Trump's sails.

But isn't replacing Biden also a giant shit show waiting to happen. Or would that be exactly what these idiots who are on the fence still, or are waffling in their support, or who are protesting Biden because of Palestine, all need to get on board? Or would they just continue to find other idiotic reasons to question anyone who goes up against Trump who doesn't meet their purity tests?

I don't know. I think I lean towards replacement, but it just makes me ill to think of doing that.....not that this is even likely to happen anyways.
 

Biden's on the Mandelbaum Pain Train

Bernie Sanders is an ubermensch, and also a policy pragmatist.  His op-ed over the weekend, calling for unity around Joe Biden as the candidate, doesn't exactly put my anxieties any more at ease over his visible issues, but it's still a nice reminder that we probably should have elected Bernie back then anyway.

I will do all that I can to see that President Biden is re-elected. Why? Despite my disagreements with him on particular issues, he has been the most effective president in the modern history of our country and is the strongest candidate to defeat Mr. Trump — a demagogue and pathological liar. It’s time to learn a lesson from the progressive and centrist forces in France who, despite profound political differences, came together this week to soundly defeat right-wing extremism...

But for over two weeks now, the corporate media has obsessively focused on the June presidential debate and the cognitive capabilities of a man who has, perhaps, the most difficult and stressful job in the world. The media has frantically searched for every living human being who no longer supports the president or any neurologist who wants to appear on TV. Unfortunately, too many Democrats have joined that circular firing squad.

Yes. I know: Mr. Biden is old, is prone to gaffes, walks stiffly and had a disastrous debate with Mr. Trump. But this I also know: A presidential election is not an entertainment contest. It does not begin or end with a 90-minute debate.

Enough! Mr. Biden may not be the ideal candidate, but he will be the candidate and should be the candidate. And with an effective campaign that speaks to the needs of working families, he will not only defeat Mr. Trump but beat him badly. It’s time for Democrats to stop the bickering and nit-picking....

So, yes, Mr. Biden has a record to run on. A strong record. But he and his supporters should never suggest that what’s been accomplished is sufficient. To win the election, the president must do more than just defend his excellent record. He needs to propose and fight for a bold agenda that speaks to the needs of the vast majority of our people — the working families of this country, the people who have been left behind for far too long....

This election offers a stark choice on issue after issue. If Mr. Biden and his supporters focus on these issues — and refuse to be divided and distracted — the president will rally working families to his side in the industrial Midwest swing states and elsewhere and win the November election. And let me say this as emphatically as I can: For the sake of our kids and future generations, he must win.

He brought the house down at the NAACP National Convention today. I can't embed this one for some reason. 

Jinnistan wrote:

He could have already taken the independent neurological exam by now.  He could have also have released whatever neurological test he supposedly took in February (it still isn't clear whether he actually did, there's been contradictory explanations of this and it took the White House over a week to disclose it).  
 

I did a bunch of research on neurologic exams, cognitive tests, brain scans and neuropsych evaluations, trying to answer some questions for myself, including
1. what are we really asking of Joe Biden when we demand a cognitive test?
2. What's the difference between a cognitive test and a neurologic exam?
3. Where do neuropsych evaluations fit in?
4. How accurate are cognitive tests?

I took notes in hopes of submitting a report on my research here but haven't composed it yet. But some takeaways are:
There are dozens of tests promoted as "cognitive tests." Some are 5-10 minutes, others can be up to an hour. Some are respected, others are scams from companies trying to steer people into seeking care they might not necessarily need, and many of the most commonly used cognitive tests are known to have high inaccuracy rates. They tend to be collections of various brain–teasers, and some are just questions that only someone with a serious problem would be unable to answer, like "What year is it?" Cognitive tests are not used to diagnose any condition. They can be thought of as "rapid tests" that may reveal the need for further evaluation.
Neuropsych evaluations are somewhat similar in format but way more rigorous and thorough. In many ways it resembles an IQ test. They take hours, the challenges are research–based and they are designed to pinpoint a wide variety of very specific executive functions.
Neurologic exams tend to involve some of these similar challenges/questions but also other things including brain imaging, DNA testing, blood samples, and review of medical history. This is the kind of test documented in Biden's health evaluation from February. As JJ points out, we don't know what all that particular neurological exam involved, but there is some standard set of procedures we would expect, and they are all present in the health document. We know he got brain imaging which ruled out certain potential problems like stroke and Parkinson's. Now, in the case of suspected dementia, brain imaging is used to rule out things like stroke and Parkinson's as potential alternative causes of dementia–like symptoms. So that's not so encouraging. The eval also in the same paragraph mentions the neuropathy in his foot, so that explains why he digressed and mentioned his foot when talking about his neurological test, and that didn't help because people took it as just one more mental lapse to go with the others. 
Biden pointed out that those demanding a cognitive test would never be satisfied. It's a valid point. And which one should we demand that he submit himself to? People still believe in lie detectors and Myers–Briggs tests, how certain are we that one cognitive test or another is any more reliable? And what will it tell us that his neurologic exam wouldn't already tell us? And even if he took every last one of them and came out looking mentally fit as a fiddle, we'd still be faced with the fact that we'd have to not just demand a cognitive test once, but every day, to track developments over time and have a better chance at catching him on one of his "bad days." But if it's a 5–minute, "person man woman camera tv" test we're looking for, then I see what he means about the duties of the office being enough of a cognitive test every day. It is the doctor's job to recommend these evaluations, and to a certain extent I want to defer to a doctor's opinion, though I know that in the ivory towers of politics it would hardly be surprising to learn of a doctor's written opinion being influenced by the most powerful office in the land. And if we're going that route, we might as well question the wording of that health report from February. I'm pretty sure it went something like, "An extremely thorough neurologic exam was encouraging." And if we're gonna suspect that level of deception, why not assume they'd just fabricate the results of any test we might demand? 

Well that's pretty much what I can report. I'm sorry I haven't included links; I didn't save them and my browser always clears my history when I close it, but the info isn't too hard to find. 

Last edited by Rampop II (7/16/2024 7:36 pm)