Joe Biden’s Big Adventure.
I looked to see if I could find evidence to support Joe Biden’s claim today that he had “‘hundred of thousands’ of people at his announcement speech for his first U.S. Senate run” in 1972. Tip to Ben Smith.
In 1972, Joe Biden was elected to the Senate with 116,006 votes (50.5%); his Republican opponent received 112,844 votes.
So far I can find no evidence that when 29-year-old New Castle County Council member Joe Biden announced his candidacy for the US Senate in 1971-72, every voter in the state, both Republican and Democratic, took off from work or childrearing to hear him speak in person.
Maybe some of our Delaware readers are old enough to remember such an amazing day. It must be seared — seared — into their memories.
perhaps we should judge john mccain on his inability to distinguish suni and shia, or the fact that he doesn't know that iraq and afghanistan don't share a border (that pesky iran is in the way, or his commitment to keep troops in irag for 100 years.
way to elevate the debate, professor.
----
Anon, doesn't that depend somewhat on the actual facts? Sure people misspeak, and if Biden had, say, 70,000 people at his initial announcement speech, no one would think twice about him rounding up. If he had 10,000 and was off by an order of magnitude, maybe it was a mis-speak in the sense you mean.
But if, as I'd guess, he had a few hundred people there, then his statement becomes a lie...it becomes a lie used solely because of the speaker's confidence in the credulity of those to whom he was speaking.
As for the ethics bill, I think most people consider it to be a joke. Pork ... still there. Lobbyist ... still employed.
Are you sure that Ben Smith didn't just misquote Biden? Have other sources reported the same phrase?
It seems at least equally likely that he meant to say "hundreds" or "a thousand" and simply messed up the line by conflating the two words.
I think you're underestimating the cynicism here. If McCain supporters can shout "gotcha" at trivial gaffes often enough, people will stop paying attention to McCain's own very real mistakes.
In the meantime, Bruce (9:27 pm) got it about right. Besides, Biden is known for being just inarticulate from time to time that I'm sure you'll get your chance to really zing him one of these days...
Trust Orin to bring a little reason into the discussion.
So Biden has a penchant for hyperbole. It's no big deal. There's nothing malevolent about what he said or what I said.
It's just such a silly thing to say.
BTW, the phrase was noted by many others, including ABC and the Washington Post, and most saw it humorously as I did.
There aren't many honest politicians today in any party. It's a shame, because like an individual, a country's character is its destiny.
Pointing out petty gaffes can be humorous, I agree. I also agree that Biden's mistake in the present case is funny.
However, it is disingenuous to suggest that humor was the purpose behind this post. The rate of anti-Obama posts that Lindgren has made (I assume that a critique of Obama's VP selection qualifies) is evidence (though not dispositive) that there is a purpose to undermine the Democratic nominee. The the present post is but one example of this pattern. BTW, I just noticed that Lindgren made another anti-Obama post a few minutes ago.
That said, I do not mind the anti-Obama posts, as they are often thoughtful and always challenge my own thinking. However, lets call a spade a spade -- this post wasn't made for the primary purpose of humor, as was implied above.
Don't I feel like a total idiot!
I disagree. My motivation was to be humorous.
Yet I don't think that one's politics are irrelevant. I think one's politics affects what we find funny.
I think conservatives or libertarians will often find different things funny than liberals will.