Joe Biden Beats Himself!—The Sequel [Updated]

Good grief, it is not even noon out here on the Left Coast, but Slow Joe has already managed to top his idiocy that John flagged earlier. Appearing on a black radio show in which he blurted out at the end, “Well, I tell you what, if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”

But if you read the entire story of the appearance as reported by Politico, it’s even worse than it sounds. (Video at the bottom.) The relevant excerpts:

“I’m not acknowledging anybody who is being considered [to be his running mate], but I guarantee you, there are multiple black women being considered. Multiple,” Biden said of his search process for a vice presidential nominee.

It was then that an aide to the Biden campaign could be heard interjecting into the conversation, attempting to cut short the interview. “Thank you so much. That’s really our time. I apologize,” the aide said.

“You can’t do that to black media!” Charlamagne retored.

“I do that to white media and black media because my wife has to go on at 6 o’clock,” Biden shot back, apparently referring to a subsequent media appearance by Jill Biden, before adding: “Uh oh. I’m in trouble.”

“Listen, you’ve got to come see us when you come to New York, VP Biden,” Charlamagne said. “It’s a long way until November. We’ve got more questions.”

“You’ve got more questions?” Biden replied. “Well, I tell you what, if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”

Charlamagne explained that “it don’t have nothing to do with Trump, it has to do with the fact [that] I want something for my community.”

This drew a howl of incredulity from CNN’s reliable race-baiter Shaun King, probably because he’s angry that Biden is so ham-handed at identity politics.

Is it too early to draw a bowl of popcorn and pour a martini?

More seriously, one thing this episode ratifies again (aside from Slow Joe’s ineptitude) is the complete grip of identity politics on the Democratic Party. When the news came out yesterday that Biden is considering Amy Klobuchar as a possible running mate, I received the following email from a lefty group named “She, the People” saying Klobuchar is unacceptable because of her deficient melanin level:

SAN FRANCISCO – Today, in response to news that Joe Biden has asked Senator Amy Klobuchar to undergo formal vetting in consideration for Vice President, Aimee Allison, Founder of She the People, released the following statement:

“The Biden campaign just made a dangerous and reckless choice. The decision ignores everything we have on the line in November and the lessons Democrats must learn from 2016. To choose Klobuchar as vice president risks losing the very base the Democrats need to win, most centrally women of color, and could be a fatal blow to the Democrats’ chance to win the White House. There is still time for Biden’s campaign to get on track.  The Biden campaign needs to choose a woman of color who will solidify the multiracial coalition we need to win.”

Oh-kay. Got it.

Meanwhile, with fortuitous timing the good people at Heterodox Academy have a short report out today entitled “White Privilege Rhetoric: Shifting Views but Losing Voters,” by Richard Hanania, a research fellow at the Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies at Columbia University. This report is actually a summary of a longer study by several authors linked in the piece. Relevant excerpts:

Co-authored by me, George Hawley, and Eric Kaufmann, a new paper titled “Losing Elections, Winning the Debate: Progressive Racial Rhetoric and White Backlash,” seeks to understand trends in American politics in the era of a more liberal public and continuing polarization. We recruited a representative sample of white Americans for a preregistered survey. Respondents received a text about former candidate for president Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a white woman whose short-lived run was notable for its embrace of the rhetoric of white privilege. Using randomized treatments, we first led respondents to believe that Gillibrand was either moderate or left-wing on issues of income redistribution. In the second treatment, it was said that she either favored reparations for African Americans and affirmative action or promised to help all Americans. Finally, we provided some participants with a real quote from Gillibrand that put forth a unifying message, while the rest received a quote from her promising to address white privilege.

We found significant backlash among white Americans in their reports of whether they would vote for Gillibrand or be worried were she to become president. While 36% reported that they would vote for Gillibrand in the control condition, a third of her support was lost in the white privilege condition, down to 24%. Having a respondent read the passage about white privilege was the equivalent of a one-point shift on a five-point measure of ideology, that is going from somewhat liberal to moderate, or from moderate to somewhat conservative. Arguing for reparations and affirmative action also reduced support, albeit to a lesser extent. . .

Thus, in the aggregate, our results suggest that a Democratic politician might lose votes from taking left-wing positions on race, but still move public opinion to the left on these issues. This might explain how, as the party becomes more focused on identity issues, Democrats can win the battle for public opinion but lose elections.

I don’t think liberals/Democrats are winning the battle for public opinion on these race and identity issues, but you can see why Steve Bannon has openly hoped that Democrats will run a fully identitarian campaign this year. And Joe Biden seems ready to oblige.

Chaser: The Babylon Bee is on it already. Because of course they are.

Here’s some video of the relevant part and tortured apologia from MSNBC:

Double-gaffe-tastic chaser: The Trump campaign has put together a 46-minute (!!) video of Biden’s greatest moments. I’m not sure there’s enough popcorn, but if you’re a glutton, take some of this in. Can we really be so lucky as to imagine that Democrats are nominating the only person who make Trump sound like Cicero?

UPDATE by JOHN: Dave Rubin’s comment is particularly apt in this era of government-encouraged snitching:

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.