The Far Left vs. Biden

Plus: Axelrod on natural politicians

By
17

Democratic strategist David Axelrod joins Jamie to discuss Donald Trump’s seemingly secured GOP victory and what Biden’s strategy should be moving forward.

The Agenda:
-DeSantis’ future
-Waiting on New Hampshire
-Biden alternatives
-Activist base voting for “Genocide Joe”

By
Comments (17)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Joseph Stevens

    Too bad Axelrod didn’t directly answer the questions. I loved it when he said “let me separate those two questions” regarding Trump being a survivable event for our Democracy. He knew he had boxed himself in somewhat based on his previous answers. Must be nice to live in another reality where everything is academic.

    Collapse
  2. Jennifer P Streit

    Axelrod's responses disappointed me--because I until this interview Jamie has been batting 1.000 with his podcasts. But Axelrod's responses did not surprise me. I quit listening to The Axe Files years ago because, time after time, he would let left-leaning or Democrat guests slide on their insufficient or inaccurate responses, but drill down mercilessly on his right-leaning or Republican guests. It became so predictable that I quit listening. I had high hopes Jamie could worm his way into Axelrod's real thoughts, but, alas even Jamie was no match for him. The podcast was a nothing burger, and I'm sorry I wasted my time. I appreciated Jamie's conversation with Mudcat all the more, particularly in contrast.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    BWG

    Jamie, thanks for having this guest, it’s very useful to know how the left frames and describes events. I agree with the other commenters, in that Axelrod certainly has a partisan viewpoint, but that’s not at all surprising. Knowing the left’s talking points helps me sharpen my own rebuttals.

    Collapse
  4. Deleted Comment

    This comment has been deleted

  5. Acre00

    The first commenter has it right: Axelrod is a political hack that said nothing of value or interest the entire interview. Trump got elected because Americans were tired of "nuance" and "complexity". It wasn't that the American people were tired of the self-righteousness and politics. No, sir! It was because Trump would enact things by fiat, something that Mr. Pen and Phone would never, ever had considered!

    You have had a lot of politicians on various podcasts at The Dispatch. Some of them I liked and agreed with, some I liked and disagreed with, and some I didn't like at all. Every single one of them brought some degree of value to listening. Every one, that is, except Axelrod.

    Collapse
  6. Bigdonmck

    I agree with previous Commenter that Axelrod is a political hack. He took time to blast Haley. She polls better vs Biden than any other Republican.
    As for Obama being a great politician, c'mon. Clinton certainly. But Obama? Not even close to Clinton.

    Collapse
  7. Francislyo

    I appreciate this pod - had never heard Axelrod before. His perspective on why Obama got elected, then was followed by Trump is moderate and informative.

    When pushed a couple of times to state whether it would have been better for the nation if Obama had lost his 2nd term to Mitt Romney and what Obama could have done differently so as to not lead to a Trump presidency, Axelrod answered not only intelligently, but moderately. (Contrast with partisan sentiments we hear like: He could have not been Black)

    Collapse
    1. Acre00

      He didn't answer the question at all. He deflected the question the first time and completely avoided it the second. He spoke a lot of words in response, but said nothing.

      Collapse
      1. Francislyo

        I see you didn’t like Axelrod’s answer. He replied that a majority of Americans look back on Obama’s presidency favorably – “the idea that you’d forgo 4 years because Donald Trump might get elected 4 years later doesn’t make sense.” Axelrod goes on to discuss the change from George W Bush to Obama as influenced by Bush’s presidency. I get his unstated implication that It wouldn’t make any more sense to suggest that Bush should have lost to Kerry because Obama might get elected 4 years later.

        Collapse
        1. Acre00

          The question was premised on the idea that Trump *would* get elected, not *might*. That is a massive change to the question, and why I said he deflected it.

          Collapse
          1. Francislyo

            You misunderstand. The question "If you knew that a re-election of Obama would be followed by Trump" does Not include causality, nor do I assume causality. If I did, then an obvious answer would be the one I described above, "He could have not been Black". This answer would have been as good as many as a *cause* of the backlash that resulted in Trump - it's widely accepted that Niki's answer on slavery and the Civil War was crafted to avoid crossing that significant proportion of Republican's primary voters who are racist (Ex: confederate flags were carried among the "patriots" on Jan 6th).

            However, I stand by my original statement that Axelrod's reply was both more intelligent and moderate than the more partisan answer addressing racism. As important as it is to address racism, the aim is to find common ground and share ideas, so I'm glad both Jamie and Axelrod avoided swiping at the extremes in the other side.

            Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Kyle Rose

    I have lived in MA for over 25 years now, and Deval Patrick was the weakest, most ineffective governor this state had over that time period. I'm having a hard time identifying a single accomplishment he can claim. Maybe being a natural politician means the ability to get elected without actually having done anything to warrant the position? I'm not sure that's a positive trait.

    Collapse
    1. Acre00

      I mean, given that this is the Obama chief of staff, I think that's exactly what he would consider a natural politician.

      Collapse
  9. Sdbrowning

    I tend to agree with the first comment. I listened while driving to work this morning. Initially I thought it would be great to have an alternative viewpoint, but I guess I was thinking of honest brokers like Ruy Teixiera. If Axelrod were working on a campaign, I'd forgive him his "not answering the question/lying" strategy. But he is at the University of Chicago. I don't question his intelligence or savvy at all. I'm also fine if he believes things that I don't. But his responses were more suited for Meet the Press. Overall a disappointing 24 minutes, unfortunately. I hope he treats his students with more respect.

    Collapse
  10. Michael.Terrien

    Alexrod remains a smart guy, but boy is he a partisan hack.

    Only issue with Biden is performance on camera. No real decline. No policy errors. Just looks a little old.

    Not a word of acknowledgement that the problem in 2016 might, just might, have had something to do with the Ds nominating the only person in America who's lack of integrity and personal corruption rivaled Trump's. No, it was just that we ignorant, benighted voters couldn't handle Obama the Great's "nuance."

    If this platform had emojis, I'd be posting wretching ones. Seriously, not sure this guy is worthy of time on the The Dispatch.

    Collapse
    1. M3sportevo

      Agree. I quit listening at ‘just looks a little old’

      Collapse