Biden Our Time: All things Joe Biden

On the other hand, considering the behaviour of prominent Christians, seeing a candidate who is so obviously only giving lip service to religion is rather refreshing.I have to say the quality of the two major-party candidates has me looking up info on the minor parties (though the history of people like Ralph Nader, Ross Perot, George Wallace, James Weaver, etc. isn't very comforting). But any votes for them would just be a protest vote, of course.Of course, in many states where the vote is a foregone conclusion (For example, Trump's not likely to take California, no matter how incompetent the pandemic, wildfires, etc. have proven the Democrat politicians there to be) a protest vote won't affect the final result and might signal the major parties to put on their big-girl panties and deal with it.Edited by Sarah Bellum, : No reason given.

You wrote

quote:

---

quote:

---

On the other hand, considering the behaviour of prominent Christians, seeing a candidate who is so obviously only giving lip service to religion is rather refreshing.

---

How so?

---

The candidates are always egged on to profess their faith (or, in the case of President Obama, to dispel rumors about their faith) that it's nice to see a candidate who is clearly making gestures that are purely ceremonial, in the style of an invocation at the beginning of a town meeting or someone saying "Bless you!" after a sneeze.

It's politics. The Clintons had to pretend to be a devoted couple (though why should a failed marriage be a detriment to a political reputation?) and President Obama had to pretend to be tolerant, at least in public, of people he considered "bitter clingers" (though why should a negative view of religion, especially in a country like the USA which separates religion from the state, be a detriment to a political reputation?)

That would explain why he would distance himself from the taint of Islam, but why should a politician be afraid to say that religion, in general, has been a negative force?Oh, right, politics

Kind of gloomy that the media is making this all a matter of China supporting Biden against Russia supporting Trump.Do the media really think Americans are so dim that they can be swayed by Chinese or Russian propagandists writing dubious FaceBook posts or articles on blogs?Although, given the relative threat from the two nuclear powers I'd pick the person Russia wants over the person China wants . . . that is, if I cared what foreigners thought about our election!Besides, haven't we got more to worry about with all the citizens of foreign countries actually living inside our borders? How much of an influence will they have on the election? Will it be more than the influence of Chinese or Russian online bloviators?

Owned by China? What, did they buy him from MBNA?

I'm still undecided at this moment. Neither candidate is very . . .Well, never mind.But as far as the abortion debate goes, whoever's President won't affect it. It's the states and their rules (and the crazies that take to violence) that will decide whether or not (legal) abortions will be performed.

Unlikely. That would be a slap in the face to the voters of states that had legalized abortion before Roe.Besides, even if Roe is "overturned" that only means states can impose more restrictions on abortion. It doesn't mean they will impose restrictions. Even before Roe, states like New York, California, Florida, Washington and Virginia had permitted abortions in some or all cases.

Careful! The "American" party of the early 19th century (nicknamed the Know-Nothing) were virulently anti-Catholic, accusing Catholics of disloyalty.The Klan was another famous hater. Remember the story of Hugo Black? He was a Klansman who defended a man who murdered a Catholic priest because his daughter converted and the priest officiated at her marriage. Since the judge and jury were also Klansmen, the guy got off!

And the issue of immigration is still with us!7% of the residents of the United States are non-citizens! Consider the friction that can cause, the problems with loyalty, the problems with people being taxed without having the power to vote for their representatives!

Like I said, it's politics. Senator Biden had to advocate school segregation because otherwise he wouldn't get the votes to be Senator. Senator Harris had to defend illegal immigration (even to the extent of supporting an illegal immigrant’s application for a law license!) while hiding exculpatory evidence in drug cases and advocating civil forfeiture (even before initiating criminal proceedings!) in order to advance her career as a California prosecutor. Not to mention how being the girlfriend of the powerful (and married) Assembly Speaker Willie Brown helped politically.It's politics. As a voter you just search desperately for politicians who sort of share your worldview and are maybe 51% public servant/49% sleazeball.(And who have a hope of getting elected)

I hold no brief for President Trump, so I'll just remind you that your argument is part of the traditional back-and-forth:"You did X!""Yeah, but you did X too!""No, you did X morely!""Did not!""Did too!"

Still, we are talking about something other than a few Mexican lettuce-cutters coming in to work for a few years who will then go home, or German employees of multinationals working in offices in Chicago or Los Angeles for a few years before being rotated to another position.We are talking about a substantial population of individuals who have a very different stake in the United States than that of citizens of the country.

Surely you're not denying that you're merely part of the "you did!" "you did too!" back-and-forth?