Fox News, tonight, showed some clips of Joe Biden, from earlier years--and his comments, as concerning the police: "Put a cop on three of four corners and guess where the crime is going to be committed? On the fourth corner, where the cop isn't. More cops clearly means less crime." -- August 20, 2002 "Fewer police on the street, preventing crime and protecting community, means more crime. And it's as simple as that. It's not rocket science"-- May 23, 2007 Nowadays, he seems to be trying (rather clumsily, I think) to thread the proverbial needle: being in favor of law enforcement (well, sorta-kinda, anyway), but not wishing to say anything that might upset the Democratic Party's increasingly leftist base. At one time, I thought that he might make a reasonable alternative to Donald Trump--who is much more coarse, crude, and brash than I would prefer. But this is just another example of why I no longer consider that idea...
Much has happened since 2002 and 2007. People, for the most part, make the best decision they can with the information they have at the time. People also mature and sometimes change their opinions or something major happens to force their hand. In this context, I'm speaking of ALL people, not necessarily Joe Biden. In fairness, Biden (like ALL candidates running now) is faced with the task of responding and reacting to nationwide (and worldwide) unrest as the economy collapses. As a result, opinions are bound to be fluid.
And how, exactly, does that vitiate what he said in the first decade of this century? (It seems as if you are merely justifying---or, at least, trying to justify-- his recent wobbliness on this issue.) Do you believe that it is no longer true that more police on the streets equates to less crime?
What I said is people can change their opinions on a subject matter. Do you stand behind EVERYTHING you ever said in 2002 and 2007? The only difference is you don't a microphone in your face where people can document your EVERY word, body language, tone, etc. The reality is ANYBODY sensible would examine their belief system in the face of something so big that it almost crumpled the world economy.
If facts come to my attention that I did not previously realize, then yes, I could, conceivably, change my position. But exactly what "facts" have come to light here, that might justify such a fundamental change? And do you really believe that this amounts to something other than a simple pandering to the Democratic base?
I am not sure anyone but Biden would know exactly what "facts" have changed his position on any subject. What if something happened in his private life that caused a drastic change in viewpoint? Nobody else would know. It's myopic to think we could/would. There could be some pandering to the Democratic base but that's what brings out the voters, isn't it? Politicians say all kinds of things to get elected and that happens on all sides.
time for a little social experiment. Pull the cops from the inner cities like Chicago, NYC, Seattle, Portland, Atlanta, SF, and try community watchdogging for a while. Maybe it will be the peaceful love fest that the Seattle Mayor speaks of. If so then 2020 will be the year of brotherly love. But if it doesn't work out, then whoops, I guess people actually need the PoPo after all. Only one way to really find out.
There is a fundamental principle known as Occam's Razor. (Basically, it states that the most obvious explanation is usually the correct one.) Do you really suppose that the possibility that "something happened in [Joe Biden's] private life" to cause this change is the most obvious explanation? There are many bad things that may be said about Donald Trump, in my opinion--including the fact that he is course, vulgar, brash, and egocentric--but at least he is genuine. And I simply cannot stand a politician who is less than genuine. Note: I am totally opposed to The Political Class--including both those with a "D" beside their names and those with an "R" beside their names--and I strongly wish for the utter destruction of The Political Class in America. Pharmacists, plumbers, electricians, and others, could--and should--run for high office, in my opinion. It would be a temporary thing--and an interruption of their careers, rather than an enhancement of them.
Maybe it was the number of times law enforcement had to interact with his kids.... From law and order to anything goes, but just for us, not for the rest of thee..... That seems to be the trajectory here.
That could have been the catalyst. Only he knows. I'm lost to name one public figure that does not practice "Do what I say, not what I do.".
You believe comparing what he said then and what he is saying now shows maturity? I think it shows political opportunism since clearly he was correct in the past not now.
I never used the word "mature". Again, all politicians are opportunists (especially during election time).
Ahhhhh Try again You believe comparing what he said then and what he is saying now shows maturity? I think it shows political opportunism since clearly he was correct in the past not now.
