He has a 40% approval rating and is less popular than Donald Trump; I don't think there's any question that he's a bad candidate. He has been an OK President, but given Trump's unpopularity this should have been an easy election for an incumbent to walk away with.
In the current MAGA environment, I’m not convinced that approval ratings are as valid or important as they used to be. Biden could wrap up 10 of Trump’s “policies”, using them word for word, and the MAGA group would bash them. Then take the exact same thing, sign Trump’s name to them, and have them be the best policies ever. There has always been a team following for some, but it is so much to the extreme now
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to calculoso For This Useful Post:
This is honestly a pretty reasonable ruling. $175M isn’t nothing and he’s still on the hook for the total amount if the appeal fails. Trump having to sell property and looking like a martyr doesn’t help anyone.
(This also has the capacity to be even funnier if he can’t even pony up the $175m)
Wtf.. Show me one time a bond was reduced. Reasonable rulinng.. nice
He’s an 81 year old legislator who had 50 years of meaningful legislative experience. He isn’t what he was. I don’t think it’s a narrative to suggest he can’t be the guy looking after everything.
I also doubt he’s the guy actually picking the people working for him anymore. Did you ever have the 75+ university prof? 100% were losing ability between 70-75.
Look at what this job did to younger Bush and Obama and how much they aged in 8 years. It is just not possible for a 76 year old to maintain that pace. Expecting an 81 year old to be able to meaningfully work 20hrs a week let alone the 80-100 put in by the typical Potus just ridiculous.
I can’t wait for the books to come out in 5 years on the Biden presidency describing the behinds the scene.
This isn’t a comparison to Trump everyone agrees that Trump is worse. It remains a failure of the Democratic Party to not have built a viable alternative and convinced Biden to pass the torch. And it remains true that an 81 year old should not be given a position of power in the largest nuclear power. It makes no sense.
I dont understand how people continue to defend Biden as a quality candidate or a candidate that’s putting in the work.
The only argument is he’s not Trump.
I think the real challenge is that there are a bunch of concrete examples of pretty good things that have come out of the Biden administration. And you ignore / brush aside those things saying "I don't believe it's him in control".
Basically your argument leaves 2 options,
Option A, your argument is wrong, he is able to be effective at his job, maybe 50 years of experience and the confidence to delegate affords him a lighter work schedule than Obama, maybe as Trump proved (by spending 40% of his presidency and vacation homes and golf course) the earlier guys were just workaholics who didn't need to be as hands on as they thought.
Option B, there is a team behind Biden guiding a lot of his choices, and the are being sound and reasonable with their guidance, which isn't really a bad thing for the world. Not a perfect analogy, but when a minor ascended a throne typically a regent would be appointed to manage, and a good regent is a good thing.
Either way, if you aren't going to argue the results over the past 4 years, why are you hung up on a single possible cause among many probable causes of the results.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to #-3 For This Useful Post:
Supposedly there was some billionaires trying to raise enough for Trump bond before it was reduced. Which of course raises the question of influence in exchange for $$ even more.
That said, to me there is at least a plausible argument that reducing the bond is reasonable. The point of a bond is to ensure the amount gets paid while the appeal process goes through, and to make it so people have to commit something to actually appeal (otherwise everything would get appealed 100% of the time).
A bond isn't however supposed to cause irreparable harm. Seizing his assets and auctioning them off is what should happen to satisfy the judgment, but that seems close to irreparable harm to have to do that to appeal. What happens if Trump wins on appeal? They can't unsell the buildings or golf courses.
The fact that there's a court appointed monitor watching everything that goes on in the Trump org makes it less likely they'll be able to hide assets and will have the info they need to seize things if Trump loses the appeal.
But rather than just reducing the bond maybe they could have done something else that would have resulted in real estate being tied up or bank accounts frozen but held waiting for the appeal results. Or maybe that's just not possible.
All that said the fact that Trump lied saying he had the cash to me should enter into it as well... If he says he can pay, then can't, well maybe just too bad so sad.
Or maybe the court figured there'd be a plausible path for Trump to argue the 8th Amendment if they left it.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Basically publicly proved Trump isn't as wealthy as he claims, that lenders don't won't underwrite anything for him because he's a broke scam artist, and now he's thanking the court for ONLY posting his bond at $175m, an amount he may be able to get, but he might not even have that in cold cash (ie would still have to sell certain assets to cover) and he's still trying to run a presidential campaign and defend mutable other lawsuits. The guy is bleeding hard. It's a shame the first case up is his silly hush money case, it's the weakest and most easily warped as political given the scandalous details.
Hey I'm sure Biden is doing his best and of course he's better than Trump but I'm just saying it's crazy that the bar is so low. The guy is 81. How do the Dems not have someone who can mop the floor with the meatball that is Donald Trump, the guys a lunatic.
You're making a whole bunch of assumptions based on the very limited information you have.
Biden is 81, yes. But you've let your imagination run wild based on that alone. What are you going on about "he can't work 20 hours a week"...? He can decide what he wants in legislation and what he doesn't want. It's not like being a mountain climber or construction worker or something. The work of being POTUS is almost entirely mental, and despite the constant noise about him being in "dangerous cognitive decline", there continues to be no evidence of this being the case. He eats properly, rides his bike, and is very sharp for someone his age.
Not only is he better and more fit for the office than Trump, he's entire galaxies better and more fit for the office than Trump.
Another Trump presidency is the end of democracy and the modern western civilized world as we know it, giving way to an autocratic hellscape from which we will probably never come back from. Biden is the continuation of democracy, and he's also pushing for improvements in key areas such as climate action, women's rights, fairer tax policy, and other progressive policies.
So we agree the positive about Biden is he’s not Trump. Now describe why he’s a could candidate without using the word Trump or the fears of a Trump. There were lots of people to choose from who aren’t Trump.
I think the real challenge is that there are a bunch of concrete examples of pretty good things that have come out of the Biden administration. And you ignore / brush aside those things saying "I don't believe it's him in control".
Basically your argument leaves 2 options,
Option A, your argument is wrong, he is able to be effective at his job, maybe 50 years of experience and the confidence to delegate affords him a lighter work schedule than Obama, maybe as Trump proved (by spending 40% of his presidency and vacation homes and golf course) the earlier guys were just workaholics who didn't need to be as hands on as they thought.
Option B, there is a team behind Biden guiding a lot of his choices, and the are being sound and reasonable with their guidance, which isn't really a bad thing for the world. Not a perfect analogy, but when a minor ascended a throne typically a regent would be appointed to manage, and a good regent is a good thing.
Either way, if you aren't going to argue the results over the past 4 years, why are you hung up on a single possible cause among many probable causes of the results.
One and the most likely one given he is 80 is very undemocratic. As to why is he a bad candidate if the results have been good? Because he 81. No 81 year old is suitable to run the US for the next 4 years. Not to mention he leaves himself open to the attack by very rational people questioning if he’s suitable for office because he is 81.
One and the most likely one given he is 80 is very undemocratic. As to why is he a bad candidate if the results have been good? Because he 81. No 81 year old is suitable to run the US for the next 4 years. Not to mention he leaves himself open to the attack by very rational people questioning if he’s suitable for office because he is 81.
Sorry, you need to explain to me what the undemocratic part is. I don’t get that part.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Whynotnow For This Useful Post:
One and the most likely one given he is 80 is very undemocratic. As to why is he a bad candidate if the results have been good? Because he 81. No 81 year old is suitable to run the US for the next 4 years. Not to mention he leaves himself open to the attack by very rational people questioning if he’s suitable for office because he is 81.
It's undemocratic because he's 81?
How about BushII and Trump becoming president with fewer votes 3 times. There are far more undemocratic things to be concerned about than you imagining that someone doesn't have agency because they are old.
I don't anyone here is arguing that Biden is the perfect guy for the perfect moment. But it's fruitless complaining about things that are wholey routed in assumptions you are making when he is objectively the best option available by every measure (including age/health, because I don't believe for a minute that cheese burger Don's lifestyle affords him better actuarial tables than Biden at only 3.5 years older, or that if you listen to him talk you can actually believe he is cognitively ahead of Biden in anyway).
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to #-3 For This Useful Post:
So we agree the positive about Biden is he’s not Trump. Now describe why he’s a could candidate without using the word Trump or the fears of a Trump. There were lots of people to choose from who aren’t Trump.
He has a very strong history of reaching across the aisle and gaining consensus with the Republicans. This is sorely needed in today’s world, seeking some middle ground instead of constantly moving parties to either extreme
He has a very strong history of reaching across the aisle and gaining consensus with the Republicans. This is sorely needed in today’s world, seeking some middle ground instead of constantly moving parties to either extreme
I think you're correct, but the emphasis needs to be on the "history" part.
There is no consensus to be reached with Marjorie Taylor Greene or Matt Gaetz. Even the "reasonable" republicans like Moscow Mitch eventually fell in line with all things Trump. The small government fiscal conservative GOP party simply no longer exists. The only faction they have retained from the early 2000s is evangelical Christians.
You can't find middle ground with people who deny facts for political gain. The only reasonable response to the current GOP is to allow them to continue losing general elections until they either move more to the middle, or splinter into multiple parties.
It seems a lot of the idea by non conservatives who haven’t been poisoned by infotainment media outlets that Biden is “Sleepy Joe” or not all there is mostly that they’ve been suckered in by the entire Trump plan. Good job guys you took the bait, dummies.
Since this crowd skews more towards retirement age voters there is also already a precedent for a non mentally functioning carcass being president. We’re being generous to say that only half of Reagan’s second term was them rolling out that vegetable for special events while the rest of the oval office ran the country. That’s still fresh in those old brains so they assume that’s the case now too.
AND JESUS CHRIST THIS GODDAMN POPUP AD HAS GONE FULL SCREEN THREE SEPARATE TIMES WHILE TYPING THIS POST UP
We really this hard up for money around here? Jesus.
The Following User Says Thank You to ResAlien For This Useful Post:
So we agree the positive about Biden is he’s not Trump. Now describe why he’s a could candidate without using the word Trump or the fears of a Trump. There were lots of people to choose from who aren’t Trump.
Did your eyes skip over my earlier post?
- American Rescue Plan
- Build Back Better
- Inflation Reduction Act
- CHIPS and Science Act
- Joining workers on the picket line
- Student loan forgiveness
- Capping insulin at $35
- Unemployment below 4%
- Withdrew troops from Afghanistan
- Sent aid to Ukraine
And a total of 136 executive orders, undoing a lot of the damage done by Trump.
Is he perfect? Far from it. But I don't really have time for your whining about "81 years old" and "not a good candidate". The fact that he's running against a full blown Hitler wannabe should be all the reason you need to get behind his re-election bid with everything you've got. But there are plenty of reasons besides that, whether you want to acknowledge them or not.
Here, does this look like a president who's simply offloading all the work and decision making to others?
__________________
Last edited by Mathgod; 03-26-2024 at 04:25 PM.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Mathgod For This Useful Post:
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
NBC firing former RNC chair Ronna McDaniel after 'on-air revolt' from anchors: report
Quote:
Former Republican National Committee (RNC) chair Ronna McDaniel is reportedly done at NBC News just days after she was hired, according to a breaking report.
Quote:
Byers attributed the impending firing of McDaniel to "on-air revolt from NBC/MSNBC talent," after a weekend of contentious segments from both NBC and MSNBC commentators engaging in rare on-camera critique of their employer's decision to hire her. MSNBC primetime host Rachel Maddow in particular went viral for her commentary about NBC's decision to hire the former GOP chair, based on her well-documented role in helping former President Donald Trump attempt to overturn the 2020 election.
Quote:
McDaniel would have been paid $300,000 as a part-time on-air political contributor on NBC News. Her hire came after the network fired MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan — who was one of the network's most critical voices of the Netanyahu regime's response to the October 7 Hamas terror attack. NBC also fired more than a dozen union-affiliated reporters prior to announcing McDaniel's hire.
“Ronna encouraged a lie that many of our own journalists have spent countless hours debunking,” the NBC News Guild tweeted. “Our journalism is tarnished by @NBCNews execs elevating a liar over the workers who have spent years delivering the kind of reporting that our newsrooms are typically known for.”
- American Rescue Plan
- Build Back Better
- Inflation Reduction Act
- CHIPS and Science Act
- Joining workers on the picket line
- Student loan forgiveness
- Capping insulin at $35
- Unemployment below 4%
- Withdrew troops from Afghanistan
- Sent aid to Ukraine
And a total of 136 executive orders, undoing a lot of the damage done by Trump.
Is he perfect? Far from it. But I don't really have time for your whining about "81 years old" and "not a good candidate". The fact that he's running against a full blown Hitler wannabe should be all the reason you need to get behind his re-election bid with everything you've got. But there are plenty of reasons besides that, whether you want to acknowledge them or not.
Here, does this look like a president who's simply offloading all the work and decision making to others?
So why in your response to my post was Trumps name mentioned at all? Even in this post you come back to the Trump is worse to conclude your argument.
We all agree Trump is worse. What’s the point in stating it everytime.
But yes that does look like a president that is being rolled out for a dog and pony show.
In the current MAGA environment, I’m not convinced that approval ratings are as valid or important as they used to be. Biden could wrap up 10 of Trump’s “policies”, using them word for word, and the MAGA group would bash them. Then take the exact same thing, sign Trump’s name to them, and have them be the best policies ever. There has always been a team following for some, but it is so much to the extreme now
MAGA zealots don't decide the election nor do they make up a large enough contingent to significantly impact Biden's approval rating or vote share. They're already voting Trump no matter what just like they did in 2020.
Biden is faltering because he has lost ground among the demographics that won him the last election, like suburban voters, nonwhite working class, etc. For whatever reason, those groups are increasingly supporting Trump. Combine that with a lack of enthusiasm among Democrats for Biden's candidacy and it's a pretty ugly scenario.
I guess I just don't follow the logic. Trump is awful, incompetent, and holds the record for the Presidential candidate with the lowest favorability rating in history. But at the same time the guy who's trailing him despite having the incumbent's advantage is a good candidate?
