Did you have the same reservations about every single presidential administration in our nation's history?
2024 U.S. Elections | Trump wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
How?
We had a literal man child who spent his days golfing, watching Fox News, calling in to Fox n Friends and gobble fast food, meanwhile life went on without major disruptions. If it weren’t for his party legislative agenda (which is influenced by ‘unelected handlers’), you wouldn’t even notice the difference, so why does this notion about the necessity of having a virile, hands on leader persist when we have had ample evidence from Reagan (2nd term) to Trump that the US gov and institutions are perfectly capable of running itself regardless of which party or person occupies the WH?
No legacy building, just simple comparison can be used to define Biden's first term thus far.
The most important person in the country in some aspects has consistently been the Fed chair for years, nothing new to the Biden admin. And, the CoS has always played an outsized role with any president & wields considerable power. Again, nothing germane to this admin singularly.
Famously there has never been another president who was accused of not actually being in charge. Dick.
Sorry, I don't know what came over me.
Did you memory hole COVID, Dobbs Decision, massive tax breaks, etc.?
And yet there's been no impeachment. The mensas at the head of the committees talk incessantly, but haven't pulled the trigger on anything.
The angina that it must create when putting faith on Comer & Jordan must be constant.
"The Big Guy" is just a dirty old politician, but sure since the Republicans are bringing it up let's dismiss it.
By the way, no one ever accused Obama or Bernie of corruption. With Joe it just doesn't stop.
Must be the Republicans then
Exactly, I for one felt safe and secure knowing that Nancy Reagans mystical fortune teller ran the Federal Government.
But seriously, the way he describes the presidency, it's like he expects it to be a dictatorship.
Which is the legislative agenda I mentioned. Unless you think Trump was solely responsible for that and the result would change if any other Republican were the president.
And yet there's been no impeachment. The mensas at the head of the committees talk incessantly, but haven't pulled the trigger on anything.
The angina that it must create when putting faith on Comer & Jordan must be constant.
I feel they will do it when most politically advantageous. They do it now, it will be old news to voters come election time.
Yet all the Repubs are doing is constantly bloviating & treading water.
That should tell you something.
Yes, Government will function regardless of President.
But just because Trump has set a very low bar, doesn't mean that should continue.
Absolutely when it comes to COVID. The damage done was not legislative but due to his disastrous and egotistical response to it. I would also argue that Dobbs and many other horrific SCOTUS decisions were a direct result of his choices for the court. Would other GOP Presidents have allowed the Federalist Society to hand pick candidates? Maybe, but Trump absolutely did.
Wouldn't surprise me if they initiated it right when they shut down the government in the coming weeks.
These aren't 'very bright guys' running the committees, to use a DeepThroat-associated plrase.
Roberts, Alito, Thomas weren’t Trump appointees. Repealing Roe is a litmus test for GOP SC nominees, it’s naive to expect otherwise.
I would concede on COVID, although the fevered, conspiratorial response from the MAGA base were also the fruits of conservative talk radio and news networks. A saner man than Trump wouldn’t have exploited that festering sore but it was always there, and the likes of Freedom Caucus or any conniving GOP politician would be waiting on the wing to play on those fears and conspiracies.
I have to question Joe Biden's judgment in the case of his son.
For one, why would he ever let Hunter Biden serve on the board of Burisma? He should have known how murky that company was. To allow that when he was the VP is a bad look.
The left leaning Atlantic had a very good piece about it last week...
The Problem With Hunter Biden’s Business - The Atlantic
For one, why would he ever let Hunter Biden serve on the board of Burisma? He should have known how murky that company was. To allow that when he was the VP is a bad look.
The left leaning Atlantic had a very good piece about it last week...
The Problem With Hunter Biden’s Business - The Atlantic
First, the reason Democrats keep getting elected is because the GOP in California offers no viable solutions just BS ring-wing idealism. Also, Newsom shouldn't be blamed for problems other Democrats created- like Jerry Brown's completely ridiculous fossil fuel burning boondoggle train from Bakersfield-Fresno to LA instead of doing something with actual economic value like building a mag-lev train from LA to Vegas. All in all, Newsom has been the best California governor in probably 40-50 years who is trying to undo the long-term damage of generations of Republican governors that sought only short-term solutions (Reagan, Duekmajian, Pete Wilson) and a Democrat governor who was a complete moron (Jerry Brown). There have also been some very bad Democrat mayors like Antonio Villagarosa in LA (also a horrible leader in the state senate when he was there because he was a champion of the failed energy deregulation scheme). Newsom also had to bring California through the worst health crisis in 100 years so personally, I'm willing to cut him a little slack for not magically solving homelessness and other macro issues. You also can't blame him for San Francisco because the problems there really come from local city policies, not state policies. And yes education is not a statewide thing, it's controlled by local school districts and if richer liberal neighborhoods vote to not share their money with poor districts, there isn't much Newsom can do about that.
Again, most of these problems have very macro causes (like systematically cutting social safety net across the country for 40+ years) and there are no Republicans offering anything close to viable solutions. I think Newsom has done an outstanding job considering the circumstances. If you don't like being asked to provide your idea of a solution then feel free to link to Republican ideas that you think would solve the issues in California.
Either way, it's just ignorance to claim Newsom caused all of these things.
Last edited:
Yes, I wrote an essay at the time about John Taft's administration
Any more nonsensical q's?
Is this a joke?
US President has tremendous power, so Joe not being all there is kind of a big deal. I'd like the American electorate to the have the right to re-underwrite Joe's mental acuity. I think that's a judgment that we should all be allowed to make.
And just because Trump set a low bar, that doesn't mean we should continue that path. I'd like to think America can do better than Trump and Biden.
Actually you’re right - Bernie was accused by the DNC of having THREE houses!
It's... it's William. William Taft. And, [shock][horror], he had unelected advisors and bureaucrats making the government function, too.Yes, I wrote an essay at the time about John Taft's administration
Any more nonsensical q's?
Side note: I can't wait till you find out who actually created the Monroe Doctrine.
Of course, I'm not saying there's equal validity to the accusations, but Obama has been accused of all kinds of crap before, during and after his presidency. Bernie has obviously been under much less scrutiny.
By the way, I think there is probably some truth to Hunter trading in influence somehow. I just don't think it's anywhere near enough to prefer any from the Republican field over another term of Sleepy Joe Biden.
Hunter Biden is a grown ass man, I assume you are too, if your father told you to support City or the Scousers and not have anything to do with Man United or Redcafe you'd do as he said - right?
I don't disagree here.
I personally don't know if Biden has lost a step cognitively, or if he just appears to sometimes because he suffers from a speech impediment, which may be more difficult to control as he gets on.
Falling off a bike certainly shouldn't be a gauge of someone's fitness to lead.
Democrats have got to be honest. If Trump leaves the race and the GOP put forward a half decent, younger candidate that doesn't divide the party like Trump has, would there be more clamor for an alternative candidate?
De Santis is a terrible politician, but against Biden in a debate, I think he would wipe the floor with him.
I think many Democrats are happy with Joe because they know he only has to stay alive to defat Trump.
Trump and most Republican governors soured on stay-at-home at the same time. Regarding the vaccine, Trump was actually booed at his own rally for supporting it, while Ron has openly doubted it. You can watch this party (Ron, Vivek, Cruz) and you will know instantly that they would never have "listened to the science".
Also, Trump did the $1200 and enhanced UI (=lowest poverty rate of all time in the US) during the pandemic, which no other Republican would have done.
His covid response was bad, but it wasn't worse than any other Republican, in one significant way, it was much better. And for the rest of the term, outside twitter and a few personal insanities (some good, mostly bad), it was very standard GOP stuff: tax cuts for the rich, killing immigrants, and killing the planet.
If my dad supported those teams, i would have followed his lead as a kid. As I did when I became a United fan.
A little different when your dad is the VP of the USA and you get given a board position at an Ukranian energy company.
Trump only did this to sweeten the electorate in 2020, which is exactly he insisted that his name was put on the checks.
Sure? That's the system working better than it normally does!
An inside look at how Donald Trump's name came to appear on stimulus checks - ABC News (go.com)
It was a terrible decision. Biden compounded the error by cutting even more stimulus checks.
I think both decisions were good, because of this:
https://www.cbpp.org/research/pover...response-turned-a-would-be-poverty-surge-into
I have no objection if he wanted to campaign off it - he was, for once in his life, doing something that helped others, why shouldn't he take credit?
In the short term. But they have been a major factor in inflation.
Which has mostly gone now.
It's a good trade-off. Made better by the fact that a massive job loss and recession would normally have seen a massive increase (rather than decrease) in poverty, so the real effect on poverty is even more than the headline reduction.
And I have some doubts about how causal it is (no doubt, stimulus caused some inflation, but how much) given the number of other factors (Russia's invasion, supply chain bottlenecks, etc).
Finally, this isn't a defence of the entire stimulus program - a lot of the """loans""" to small businesses were straight-up fraud, this is just about the cheques and increased UI, which was ~25% of the total.
Not sure if you are lumping it in with the "checks", the child tax credit was a incredibly beneficial to millions of children:Which has mostly gone now.
It's a good trade-off. Made better by the fact that a massive job loss and recession would normally have seen a massive increase (rather than decrease) in poverty, so the real effect on poverty is even more than the headline reduction.
And I have some doubts about how causal it is (no doubt, stimulus caused some inflation, but how much) given the number of other factors (Russia's invasion, supply chain bottlenecks, etc).
Finally, this isn't a defence of the entire stimulus program - a lot of the """loans""" to small businesses were straight-up fraud, this is just about the cheques and increased UI, which was ~25% of the total.
" We find that the Child Tax Credit lifted 2.9 million children out of poverty. Additionally, we find that the 2021 expansion of the Child Tax Credit accounted for 2.1 million of these 2.9 million children lifted above the poverty line. "
The Impact of the 2021 Expanded Child Tax Credit on Child Poverty (census.gov)
Ah, I remembered it, and forgot whether it was in the same bill or not. If it was in the same bill,even added on to the cheques+UI, together they would still be about <40% of the stimulus based on this.
I read this and laughed out loud at how far away this is from reality. The easiest step in the immigrant entry process is writing the civic test. It is clearly given to people who have been selected to become immigrants to learn about the country. Like the brochure you get after you enter the zoo. It is sometimes better to refrain from saying things we are not aware of.
Also, comparing this to Jim Crow has to be the most ridiculous media narrative parroted here by many users. I have discussed about the merits of this test at length with Raoul in the previous conversations. Jim Crow era is the darkest part of American History remnants of which is still impacting modern black americans in many forms. However, tying this to literacy test has to be the kind of demagoguery absurdity used by politicians to obfuscate things.
Black Americans were maimed/lynched/burnt alive for getting near any form of literacy or books. Even learning basic alphabets was a rarity among the black community and even that was considered to be a serious threat by the racists in the Jim Crow era. Conducting literacy tests during this era was patently racist and cynical with the only intention of denying their voting rights.
Now lets compare this with Vivek's test: This test mandates young voters age of 18 of ALL colors/religion/race etc. to learn about their country and its governance before they vote, similar to the half a million immigrants who take these tests every year or else serve in first responder positions or wait to vote till 25, and this is mentioned in the year 2023 not 1965 and has nothing to do with race. These two are the same because the questions are identical? Have some sense of proportion and reality in criticizing something. The rest of the people chirping here have to research their contents better and stop making fancy headline idealism hyperboles to curb honest analysis.
Also stop lecturing about ad-hominem. It will take seconds to learn what it is by googling. It means, your argument is about a person than their position. Any half-witted person would know that in this forum apart from very few matured posters most of them have nothing to say in terms of substance and readily jump the gun at the other person without understanding their position using their own moral hypocrisy to judge and bash the person in order to cover up their own ignorance -ad hominem right there. Also, when I said childish posters (like yourself), it would definitely be ad-hominem but I was also stating the facts.
Last edited:
This is why Biden won.
X will allow political ads from candidates, parties ahead of US election
https://www.reuters.com/technology/...didates-parties-ahead-us-election-2023-08-29/
What could possibly go wrong?