[Discussion] Welcome to the Biden Administration!

Anything related to Biden and his upcoming administration. May this thread be less active and controversial as that last guys thread.

OG_slinger wrote:

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/AeAhV6h.png)

He said "shut down"! The economy is over! America is over! #stoptherecount

GA recount is giving Biden MORE votes. I will admit, I chuckled when I saw the news.

Biden nets 28 votes from latest batch of uncounted ballots in Georgia audit

Another memory card with uncounted votes was discovered during Georgia’s statewide audit, giving a small boost to President-elect Joe Biden, a top election official told reporters on Wednesday.

Gabriel Sterling, Georgia’s voting systems implementation manager, said local officials in Douglas County, just west of Atlanta, “forgot to upload” results from one memory card on Election Day.

The memory card had 156 votes for Biden, 128 votes for President Trump, and seven votes for Libertarian nominee Joe Jorgenson, Sterling said. That slight edge for Biden in this latest batch puts his statewide lead at 12,781 votes, with almost the entire audit completed, Sterling said.

r013nt0 wrote:

Obama gave positions to plenty of lobbyists and industry insiders/execs, so it's not super hard to believe that Biden will do the exact same since he takes plenty of that money himself (and always has) and other positions he has filled so far are also filled with lobbyists.

I remember when Obama appointed a cable lobbyist as head of the FCC, and everyone proclaimed he was going to murder net neutrality.

Four years later, as that person left the FCC, people wondered how net neutrality was going to survive without him.

You mean sometimes you want subject matter experts helping administer public policy and you rely on effective leaders to set the policy goals and administrators to make it so?

Crazy talk!

*cough* Timothy Geithner *cough* "foam the runway" *cough*

do we have a substitute for *cough* in the era of Corona? seems a bit tacky.

We certainly want to rely subject matter experts, but just because someone is an expert in a subject does not mean they lack a policy perspective that is going to color the help they give.

Think about it this way: RBG was certainly an expert on the subject of the law.

So was Scalia.

The fears about Wheeler were on-the-nose, considering his industry background. But it turned out that he'd been involved with small ISPs, and saw how abusive and predatory the big ones were. In his case, his industry experience turned out to be a massive asset, and since he wasn't looking for a big payoff and a cush job after leaving government, he did the right things while in office. He was a true civil servant, and I'd thank him for that if I ever met him.

That's not, unfortunately, always the case.

Agreed.

Expertise is a necessary, but not sufficient, factor for effective public service.

You could definitely give him kudos but don't forget to give some credit to the vetting of the Obama administration.

He certainly wasnt the dingo we feared he could have been.

fangblackbone wrote:

You could definitely give him kudos but don't forget to give some credit to the vetting of the Obama administration.

Consider that the different department heads are taking policy guidance from the president. A fish rots from the head and when it comes to the Trump admin, it doesn't get any more rotten. This is why Wheeler worked out.

*Legion* wrote:

I remember when Obama appointed a cable lobbyist as head of the FCC, and everyone proclaimed he was going to murder net neutrality.

Four years later, as that person left the FCC, people wondered how net neutrality was going to survive without him.

Yup, and we sure didn't have any corporate mega-mergers in that time, nope, none at all. We certainly didn't go even further down the path of full blown monopolies in any way.

r013nt0 wrote:
*Legion* wrote:

I remember when Obama appointed a cable lobbyist as head of the FCC, and everyone proclaimed he was going to murder net neutrality.

Four years later, as that person left the FCC, people wondered how net neutrality was going to survive without him.

Yup, and we sure didn't have any corporate mega-mergers in that time, nope, none at all. We certainly didn't go even further down the path of full blown monopolies in any way.

We weren't enforcing antitrust laws before that appointment either, so that's not a change.

Mixolyde wrote:

We weren't enforcing antitrust laws before that appointment either, so that's not a change.

I was promised change. (and Hope)
IMAGE(https://imgflip.com/s/meme/I-Was-Told-There-Would-Be.jpg)

r013nt0 wrote:

I was promised change. (and Hope)
IMAGE(https://imgflip.com/s/meme/I-Was-Told-There-Would-Be.jpg)

If you like your current stapler, you can keep it!

Keldar wrote:
r013nt0 wrote:

I was promised change. (and Hope)
IMAGE(https://imgflip.com/s/meme/I-Was-Told-There-Would-Be.jpg)

If you like your current stapler, you can keep it!

FOX: "IS OBAMA TRYING TO FORCE YOU TO USE HIS SOCIALIST OFFICE SUPPLIER?! FIND OUT TONIGHT ON BILL O'REILLY."

And probably more than cases of actual voter fraud.

Not really a good look, honestly.

Biden Transition wrote:

Donate to the Biden-Harris Transition
During these unusual times, your support is appreciated more than ever before. Your contribution to the Biden-Harris Transition will help us lay the foundation to lead a just and equitable recovery that builds an economy for the future. Thank you for your generosity and continued support as we prepare to build our nation back better.

r013nt0 wrote:

Not really a good look, honestly.

Biden Transition wrote:

Donate to the Biden-Harris Transition
During these unusual times, your support is appreciated more than ever before. Your contribution to the Biden-Harris Transition will help us lay the foundation to lead a just and equitable recovery that builds an economy for the future. Thank you for your generosity and continued support as we prepare to build our nation back better.

It’s because of the Trump appointee in the GSA that’s refusing to authorize the budget for the transition team, forcing them to pay out of pocket trying to get things ready for January. I’ve been chided here for how critical I am of Biden before, but the person who tweeted this is reading too much into it and blaming the wrong people.

I disagree. The DNC should surely have a war chest for emergencies like this.

Perhaps I give them too much credit.

r013nt0 wrote:

I disagree. The DNC should surely have a war chest for emergencies like this.

Perhaps I give them too much credit.

IMAGE(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/650/747/aaf.png)

But in all seriousness, they just spent billions on candidates in the months before the election and are now pouring money into the Georgia run-off. This bullsh*t with the transition is coming at the worst time.

ruhk wrote:

It’s because of the Trump appointee in the GSA that’s refusing to authorize the budget for the transition team, forcing them to pay out of pocket trying to get things ready for January. I’ve been chided here for how critical I am of Biden before, but the person who tweeted this is reading too much into it and blaming the wrong people.

The Trump appointee in the GSA isn't refusing to authorize the budget for the transition team. Congress already authorized the funds under the Presidential Transition Acts (PTA) of 1963 and 2015.

The Trump appointee is refusing to ascertain that Biden is the apparent winner, which is the statutory requirement for unlocking the money to pay staff and expenses as well as arguably more important things like office space, equipment, and, critically, access to government officials and information sources.

The person who tweeted this doesn't understand how transitions work or where the money comes from--both that Americans are already paying for the transition because that's how taxes work and that incoming transition teams have historically raised additional outside funds.

r013nt0 wrote:

I disagree. The DNC should surely have a war chest for emergencies like this.

If the DNC needs to have a warchest for the erosion of democracy and the rule of law then we're all going to have to dig deep. This is a manufactured crisis that's short-circuiting the fact that multiple Congresses have understood the need and value of helping incoming administrations and have both codified that into law and by authorizing funding.

Also, those Presidential Transition Acts say that no one person, group, or organization can give a presidential transition--which has to be established as its own 501(c)(4) organization--more than $5,000. That means the DNC can't just bankroll Biden't transition. And it's the same reason Biden can't fund his transition with leftover campaign funds. It's illegal.

Biden's also chosen to apply the same restrictions to transition fundraising as he did to his campaign. That means no money from corporations or their PACs, federal government contractors, registered federal lobbyists, or registered foreign agents.

r013nt0 wrote:

I disagree. The DNC should surely have a war chest for emergencies like this.

Perhaps I give them too much credit.

Just to give some perspective, the *RNC* with all its plutocrats and fat cats behind it is broke.
The DNC is fighting an asymmetric war on several fronts against an enemy that is trashing all norms and trying to kick out the supports of democracy. I'm not suggesting you donate, but if this suggests that the Dems might actually fight, that's a good thing.

Biden's natsec and foreign policy appointments.

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/dL5oR9U.png)

This is the least important take of all but: A. Blinken? I'll get by on that and Robin Hood: Men in Tights references for years.

LouZiffer wrote:

This is the least important take of all but: A. Blinken? I'll get by on that and Robin Hood: Men in Tights references for years.

Did you say "Abe Lincoln?"

Crazy to see public servants with relevant experience being nominated again.

Adding the UN Ambassador to the Cabinet and putting the Climate Change czar in the NSC is a really good idea.

Focusing on climate change as a national security issue means that it may be possible to get some of that sweet defense money, technology, and manufacturing capacity working to fight climate change.

Janet Yellen for Treasury