Joe Biden is either the singularly greatest president to have ever lived and our only hope for the future or the worst president in history, a total disaster, possibly the entire reason everything bad has ever happened.
I haven't decided who I'm voting for yet, so I can't tell which.
I don't think Trump thought he would win, so he was unprepared, and he had some of the most incompetent people possible around him. He and the people around him will be prepared this time. A plan has already been drafted (Project 2025) by, presumably, intelligent people at right-wing think-tanks. Also, his rhetoric has changed, becoming similar to other historical and current dictators, and his "policies" have become more fascist (e.g. rounding up 11 million people in the U.S. for detention and forcible relocation).
Furthermore, while he was president, he did do some pretty dictator-like things. He had federal officers in unmarked vans abduct protestors with bags over their heads. He had the US Marshals assassinate Michael Reinoehl. He tried to get election results changed. And he tried a coup.
I think his, and his future administration's goal will be to establish a one-party-rule, similar to Russia's, with a more christofascist flavor. His and his family's personal goals will be to enrich themselves by selling-out the state, and the christofascist stuff just provides them with the coalition they need to do so.
Do you understand how this is propaganda lines? They want you scared so you vote how they want. I would tell you how Biden is much much worse, but you have been indoctrinated.
Lets take the one you guys dont understand how bad it is. The Saudis are not going to sell the oil in USD anymore after decades directly due to Biden admin.
Yeah exactly, you dont understand what the this means or the actual implications it. Its literally the beginning of the unraveling of the dollar. You guys need to actually listen to people that explain these things to you, not just give you more propaganda.
Research two things: petro dollar and world reserve currency. Until you understand what is going on with those you wont be able to have a educated opinion.
I am talking about the democrats that would do anything for power. Just take a peak at one of the top stories right now, AOC wants to replace the supreme court because she didnt like what they did.
Evidence is light, inconclusive, but there. Which isn't unsurprising, given the "blue wall of silence." I'm going to lean on trusting protestors and reputable news orgs and journalists over the government and criminal justice system. Just like I don't think politicians in Russia just have bad luck with windows or coming into contact with poisonous substances.
there is no longer such as thing as "reputable news org". For most online media, their sole revenue source are ads. Sensationalized articles generate more traffic. At best, you could say one org is better than the next, but that's not saying much.
this article provides no photo, video, or audio recordings to corroborate anything they've stated. Not even the interviews have an audio recording.
there is nothing in that article about Trump instructing anyone to abduct protestors in unmarked vans.
there is nothing in this article about Trump ordering US Marshals to assissinate anyone.
It frightens me how much of your own bias colors your judgement. You have drawn wild "conclusions" (for a lack of a better term) based on something that is barely consider evidence (evidence maybe, certainly not proof).
Meh. Absolute proof only exists in mathematics. You have to make inferences at some point. To me, my "conclusions" seem obvious. If it walks and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. If the evidence of Trump's character was only just one data point, I would just give them the benefit of the doubt. But, his campaign is promoting Nazi propaganda. He says he'll be a dictator on day one. The heritage foundation says a second U.S. revolution is coming, which will be bloodless, if the "left" doesn't fight back. There's just so much evidence of Trump's character, and the far-right's stated plans, the "conclusion" os inescapable. Anyone who says otherwise is just putting on blinders or being willfully ignorant, IMO.
Your hatred for Trump is blinding you to other, more likely conclusions. These individuals could have just as easily acted on their own. Or, since the man who was killed murdered a man not long before his own death, it could have all gone down as the police stated (though the lack of video from any vehicle or body came is odd).
If you would simply admit to this, it would be unfortunate, but the fact that you've convinced yourself you have come to the right conclusion, and anyone who doesn't agree with you is ignorant, is frightening. I would encourage you to perform some level of self reflection, using this situation as an example.
The actual facts are this: there is zero evidence Trump ordered anyone kidnapped into unmarked vans, and there is zero evidence he ordered anyone to be killed. Now, that doesn't mean other people didn't give these orders, but there is no evidence of that either.
Please stop spreading false information and propaganda. All your doing is adding to the culture war. Trump has done plenty of heinous shit in his life. No need to make stuff up.
Did you miss the part where they were trying to murder most of congress?
Also:
Within 36 hours, five people died: one was shot by Capitol Police, another died of a drug overdose, and three died of natural causes, including a police officer. Many people were injured, including 174 police officers. Four officers who responded to the attack died by suicide within seven months. Damages caused by attackers exceeded $2.7 million.
You mean the ones where cops and white supremacists pretended to be protesters and started smashing windows and setting fires themselves, because the real protestors weren't doing anything that they could be arrested for?
So when you try to murder people you unarmed into a building filled with armed men?
People who illegally entered Capitol grounds during the insurrection were armed with a wide variety of weapons, including guns, stun guns, knives, batons, baseball bats, axes and chemical sprays. The Department of Justice said in an official update last week that so far “over 75” people charged in connection to the attack “have been charged with entering a restricted area with a dangerous or deadly weapon.”
...by submitting a fake slate of electors. I feel like this is not that complex of a concept to grasp, but I'll simplify it for your FOX News-addled mush brain:
Imagine a scenario in which 10 people eating at a restaurant all want to decide what to have for dessert. After some discussion, they've narrowed the choices down to Key Lime Pie or Cheesecake. The kitchen will only make one dessert for the table, so the table has to pick one or the other, they can't have both. Naturally, the table takes a vote to see which dessert a majority of people will be satisfied with. 6 people vote for Key Lime Pie, and 4 people vote for Cheesecake. Key Lime Pie wins. So the table sends one of their group to go and take the order to the kitchen, making it official. But along the way, one of the Cheesecake guys decides that they don't give a shit if most of the people at the table wanted something different and they intercept the guy delivering the order. They tell that person that a few people at the table changed their minds and now Cheesecake actually won so they should tell the chef to make that instead. Of course, the people at the table did not change their minds, this was a lie meant to trick the person delivering the order into doing what they wanted rather than what the majority demanded.
Given that scenario, don't you think it's unfair that the people who voted for Key Lime Pie would have been deprived of the dessert that they actually wanted and most people agreed on had the person who submitted the fake order actually succeeded?
Same thing here. Trump was the government, so there was nothing to overthrow. He overturned the election to remain in power past his mandate. Hence why I'm wondering why you're talking about needing fighter jets to overthrow a government because that's not what we're talking about, nor is violent revolution always a prerequisite for a coup d'état.
I am aware of the situation, and its the same things that democrats would do in the same situation. Both teams do a bunch of bullshit and fight in court over each election now. You assume that I am a trump vote, but I am not. I just know that your team sucks more than his team and does worse things, like try to throw the most likely presidential candidate in prison.
I am aware of the situation, and its the same things that democrats would do in the same situation.
That which is asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. No proof that democrats would do the same in that situation and we have 200 years of peaceful transfers of power to prove that.
You assume that I am a trump vote, but I am not.
Nobody simps this hard for Trump if they aren't also planning on voting for him too. It's okay, I already think you're an idiot, I can't possibly have a lower opinion of you right now. You might as well just say the quiet parts out loud. I'm certainly not trying to convince you to change your vote at this point. I already know whose "team" you are on anyway, since you seem to think this is just a game.
I just know that your team sucks more than his team and does worse things, like try to throw the most likely presidential candidate in prison.
The RNC had two whole years to pick another candidate. Two years knowing that Trump was under felony indictment and could very likely be imprisoned right around the election. This was not an accident - they are using the fact that Trump is being tried in court as a political weapon. The Republicans think you are stupid and will try to convince you that this is a plot by the democrats when in reality, Trump did this to himself by committing the crimes he did. If Trump doesn't want to go to jail, maybe he should have thought about the consequences.
I mean in terms of what he's actually achieved he probably the best president we've had in my lifetime, and considering his lack of control in the houses, that's pretty big.
There a multiple people running, the only third party candidate that is actually on the ballot in all 50 states (RFK is not on all 50 states ballots) Chase Oliver gets no airtime, the msm rather talk to you about brain worms then a practical candidate.
Yeah but Chase wants to completely get rid of all tariffs, so, I mean, some of his policies aren't the greatest. He's also got absolutely no idea how healthcare works, wants to completely abandon all our military bases, and he doesn't even mention global warming in his policies.
Guns? Great. Drugs? Great. Crime and punishment? Great. Privacy? Great.
But most of his power and economics policies would completely dog-fuck the US economy and our ability to negotiate on the international stage.
So a less then perfect candidate is worse than Trump or Biden? I just want to understand why so many write him off while hating the situation writing him off gives us.
Oh, no, if I would vote for more than one person, I'd probably vote for him, Biden, and whoever happens to be the green party candidate (hello Approval Voting). But as it stands right now, I can only pick one, and Biden offers the fewest compromises in the least damaging areas, in my opinion. Well, maybe whoever is leading the Greens, but my state is somewhat competitive so I'm forced to be strategic and pick between the two front-runners.
Chase wants to completely get rid of all tariffs, so, I mean, some of his policies aren’t the greatest
He makes a compelling argument against tariffs as public policy. But he's still a business-first libertarian, which means his views on environmental regulation and labor rights and various federal public services also suck.
Guns? Great. Drugs? Great. Crime and punishment? Great.
Eh. I wish his immigration policy was as laisse-faire as his guns and drugs policy.
But most of his power and economics policies would completely dog-fuck the US economy
Our economy was dog-fucked ages ago, when we deindustrialized the midwest and plowed endless subsidies into FIRE and Tech sectors. Now we've got a bunch of computers churning out trillion dollar digital nothings, while investment cash flows like a waterfall into finance, insurance, and real estate, but our actual industrial capacity remains in a vestigial state.
We can't even make enough new silicon chips to feed our antiquated ICE engine automotive industry.
I don't think Oliver really has a path out of that mess, but its hardly his fault we got here.
I prefer the term rat-fucked. Because one small group came in and took all the best parts of the Economy, leaving everyone else with powdered eggs and ham loaf. Not to mention the extra constipation causing cheese product.
At least when dog-fucking occurs, cute puppies come out. After a good rat-fucking, all you get is weird diseases and shame.
It sucks, and is something we absolutely need to fix in the future…
But we're literally picking the new head of the HR department. And every head of HR before this person was picked this way, because of the policies set by that HR department. Like, the only way you could change this rule would be for 37 of our 50 departments to come together and agree to change the rules as part of a company wide convention. And all of them run their HR systems the same way, so that doesn't look too likely.
Start at the bottom and work your way up. It will take a long time. Meaningful change always will. But we got Fargo and St. Louis using Approval Voting and proved a small group of motivated individuals can change their government.
You do realize this is exactly the problem and the reason half of eligible voters sit at home on election day. Keep putting up shitty geriatrics and see how long it takes you to reach your future fix.
^
What happens to a mfer with no concept of class consciousness and a lack of understanding of the present dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. The only way forward that doesn't involve fascist genocide is the creation of a true workers' party. Yes, the implication is that a workers' party would be for the complete dissolution of the United States, but that is what is needed right now.
If you disagree, you may as well tell any of the families of the 35k ethnically cleaned Palestinians that they must indefinitely wait until you get your genocidal ecocidal government (which was devised only 4 generations ago by rich, white, landowning slavers) sorted out.
"Just hold on folks! We are still figuring this out!". Bullshit. We tried our experiment, and we quickly failed. The backslide into genocidal fascism has begun. The only recourse is to abandon American electoralism, read Marx, and start planning for what comes next. We have a moral obligation to look at our genocidal nation and call a spade a spade. Dispelling the chauvinist myth that we as Americans protect the world and dispense limitless freedom to all is one of the first baby steps from liberal to leftist, and admittedly it's not easy.
Biden doesn't have to run! Run any other Democrat with some publicity and bonafides. Continuing to prop up a corpse that is doing less genocide than the other option would isn't the virtue that you think it is.
Leftist started grumbling about Biden's inadequacy right after he barely won the general. They started yelling after he sold out railway workers. They started sounding alarm bells once his polling started to trail Trump's during the latter's multiple concurrent criminal cases. They started screeching once the genocide started on Oct 7.
For you to sit here now and throw your hands up saying "well its too late! we don't have an alternative!" does nothing other than show how ignorant you have been these past few years. Your head has been in the sand, and this backslide into fascism we're seeing now is the only logical conclusion. The leftists were right about Biden all along, and that is becoming increasingly clear as time goes on.
I've heard of Newsom. I don't know who this guy is, and apparently he's not interested in the job. Both Sanders and Clinton have come out in favor of Biden. But I'll make you a deal. If someone with a reasonable chance pops up, I'll vote for them, if you promise to vote for Biden. Deal?
My vote really doesn't matter in my state for president (way too partisan) and it doesn't change that Biden is likely going to lose the electoral college. So, uh, sure. Costs me nothing, maybe gets someone to support reason with a replacement. Easy deal.
Yeah, I was one of the leftists calling Biden a good for nothing fuckhead for the past 3 years. And then new year's day 2024 happened, and like every leftist I started focusing on preventing a fascist from winning the general election. At first that meant pushing for other candidates in the primary, and now it means helping Biden win.
Meanwhile, the politically aware centrists who had been cooperating with the left for the past three years, continued to try and prevent a Democrat presidency in 2024 because Both Sides Bad
Not everything is about defeating Trump. Some of us have a moral compass.
For example, I will not ignore, deny, or downplay an ongoing genocide just because it would suit my presidential preference.
Additionally, now is the best time to attack Biden, because he is a huge underdog after his horrific debate performance. Attacking Biden is pushing the DNC to change candidates before it's too late. Supporting Biden at this juncture is just helping to elect President Trump.
That's the most privileged moral compass imaginable.
Actual people in America have died because of Trump's policies. Not just due to Covid, but because they were denied abortions, or because the people with guns knew the cops wouldn't care if a transperson got killed.
What are you going to say when Trump has the right to deputize a million or so Kyle Rittenhouses?
You are acting like my joke comment on a Lemmy meme is going to sway the election lol
Look I get it, you will support Biden until he loses, then you will blame people like me for his loss. It's a comfy position to hold, you never have to examine your own positions- just blame others.
We both agree Trump is horrible. You dont have to remind me. My beloved grandmother, the best person in my life, died of covid during the Trump presidency. I will never forgive him, and I certainly will never vote for him.
But just because I fucking hate Trump doesn't mean I'm going to deny reality. Actual people die because of Trumps policies, that we agree on. But Gazans are actual people too, and you seem to be denying that.
But you will aid genocide just because it suits your presidential preference. Filthy liberal.
"I'll help Trump get elected and bomb the West Bank! That'll show Biden!"
You apathetic centrists put your political teams over actual people's lives. You treat politics like it's a fucking wrestling match and you buy into the DNC's kayfabe.
No, I'm responding to the right comment. You're the liberal who'll risk a Trump presidency in the name of your hatred of Biden, right? The one who buys into DNC lies that they care more about winning the presidency than they do about having Biden as candidate?
So accurate criticism of Biden is now "risking a Trump presidency"? You're suggesting that I should stop talking about an ongoing genocide?
And by criticizing Biden's genocidal actions, this makes me a centrist, a liberal, and even worse, a DNC believer? I am so confused.
Its fascinating how you bluemaga people can claim to be the defenders of democracy and free speech, yet your words betray the fact that you hate both concepts.
Your actions have consequences, liberal. You have the right to free speech even when you use it to subvert democracy, and I have the right to tell you to shut up. I know Daddy Elon says free speech means no consequences for what you say, but he's a dipshit and so are you. People are allowed to tell you to shut up. Criticise Israel in a manner other than telling people not to vote against fascism. It's easy, look, I'll show you:
Israel is committing a genocide and Biden is ethically obligated to stop supplying the IDF and to commit to military action against the IDF's bases of operations.
See? I criticised Israel, I acknowledged genocide, and I laid out concrete action the US can take against Israel. I even criticised Biden! How about that! What I didn't do, is tell people not to vote against fascism. Now, I know for a liberal like yourself, the idea of opposing fascism is quite repugnant, but that's because you're a shithead.
I don't see how an investigation into which of the ruling class' two political parties will do more genocide on Palestinians has anything to do with me calling out your dystopian and perverted view of democracy. No one is claiming that Biden will be worse for Palestinians.
Oh right, the war in Gaza is completely Biden's fault and not the product of decades of politics coming to a head in a way the US can't explicitly control. I think I saw Biden out there personally shooting Palestinian children in the face 🙄
You're right, it's not all Bidens fault. There are many evil actors in this conflict. But that doesn't mean Bidens hands are clean.
Hes the one supplying all the bombs, going so far as to hide humanitarian reports and circumventing US law so the munitions can keep flowing.
Hes the leader of the nation which is vetoing UN peace agreements.
He is spreading pro-genocide propaganda. Remember when he went on live television to address the nation and said that he saw pictures of 40 beheaded babies? What a horrific thing to lie about.
If the Nuremburg laws would apply to US presidents, then each one of these actions would be legal grounds to convict Joe Biden for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
All of these things, but still Biden does not directly have the power to end this conflict. Blaming him for it happening as if he's the one crushing Palestinians under the rubble of their houses is dishonest.
Reagan called up Israel one night and told them to stop their assault on Lebanon. Israel stopped in less than 24 hours.
HW Bush called up Israel and ended that conflict overnight.
What makes you think Biden does not have the same power?
And if a phone call doesn't work, he could stop sending bombs. He could stop providing political cover. Instead of handing Israel billions of taxpayer dollars, he could impose economic sanctions like we did to Russia.
Joe Biden could turn Israel into a militarily vulnerable pariah state. What makes you think that this isn't enough leverage to end the genocide?
There's no magic button that ends this conflict, except the one that lies on Netanyahu's desk. Israel isn't dependent on the US in the way that you're trying to make it sound. If the US pulls away from Israel, it creates a vacuum that US's adversaries are chomping at the bit to fill.
They won't suddenly go broke. They won't suddenly be disarmed. They won't suddenly decide the war isn't worth it. They will take money and weapons from other nations who want their influence in the middle east and the only thing that will change is the US losing that influence.
Look, I'm not saying that Biden's hands are clean either. The US as a governmental body is complicit in this heinous war.
What I am saying is that you are woefully naive if you think a phone call could end this. That phone call already happened. It was international news. Netanyahu laughed in Biden's face.
They will take money and weapons from other nations who want their influence in the middle east and the only thing that will change is the US losing that influence.
If the US stops supporting Israel, which other nation will step in and send them 1500lb bombs, highly advanced targeting systems, tens of thousands of artillery shells (theres a worldwide shortage), propelling charges for howitzers, hellfire missiles, disposable shoulder fired rockets, and a plethora of small arms? Be specific.
There are only 4 or 5 nations with the ability to supply the weaponry that Israel needs. China and Russia have been opposed to the genocide since the beginning, so unless they take a dramatic self-destructive turn, this only leaves western nations. Do you think Germany, Japan, or South Korea would defy the US in order to support Israel?
That phone call already happened. It was international news.
Can you provide a source for this?
The only story I'm aware of is how Biden's aides have been leaking how hes having confrontational phone calls with Netanyahu. This is obvious spin in order to placate the anti-genocide sentiment in this country. If you actually believe this narrative then you are the woefully naive one.
The call where Biden urged a ceasefire and Netanyahu completely ignored it? I think you think the US has more power in this situation than they actually do.
The US provides about 1% of Israel's GDP in military aid and Israel already exports weapons and ammo it doesn't need. Who would provide American-centric weaponry is irrelevant to the question of whether the war would stop.
To add to that, it literally doesn't matter who steps in to aid Israel, as the aid itself is less important than the potential ally and the strategic act of robbing the US of influence in the middle east. You think Russia or China wouldn't stoop to changing their position on a massacre to get a step up politically? Two countries currently hosting genocides of their own?
A magic stop button doesn't exist for the US. We're clearly not going to agree on that so this is where our conversation ends. Goodnight.
I have indeed. That does not seem to change how rare of a surname it is, I don't think. Especially when speaking of U.S. politics, I'm assuming he's American or at least in the U.S. which seems to narrow it from people in Poland. It seems like it's much more likely to be related than someone with the last name Smith related to another Smith.
I'm not trying to imply they are alike in personality or anything past the surface level; I just think it's interesting as I have hardly ever heard that name in the U.S.
Edit: I just looked it up and Andy has stated there is no relation.
Look, the guy might have been fantastic and sharp years ago, but mental decline at that age happens and happens fast sometimes.
The question I'm asking isn't what will be the fate of the world if he gets reelected, such an old man in office, my question is what might be mismanaged or handles poorly NOW, because we just saw how incapable he is of pretty basic stuff, and he's already at the helm of a huge counter making gigantic decisions that affect billions one way or another.
I don't wish him any I'll will, but I think there should be an age limit on political office, not to mention far stricter cognitive testing. We need our world leaders to be the sharpest, quickest, on-point minds the country has to offer.
"Most progressive" is a very low bar to clear given the presidents we've had. Unemployment is not controlled by the president. The credit for capping insulin prices should go to Bernie Sanders, who would've been the president starting back in 2016 if the democratic party hadn't insisted on crowning Hillary. We could've had a much better president and no Trump!
Because the democracy is a farce. The parties control their primary elections and can rig them however they want. The US legalized bribery with Citizens United and again last week with Snyder v. United States.
Plus one of the former applicants was accused of both communism and antisemitism, the latter just due to not being 1000% pro-Israel and despite being Jewish himself. One another had "bad vibes", people called her a "warhawk", and called the former guy's fans misogynist bros.
The propaganda was so strong some liberal black content creators called "socialists" as "having anti-black and misogynistic biases" because we could just fix capitalism to be not bigoted. Fortunately, they got better on this front.
Lots of people in the US have anti-black and misogynistic biases. Some of them happen to be socialists.
This is, in fact, a problem I have with some socialists. They think that solving economic issues will solve everything. You can't have people being shot dead in the streets by police and then tell them "Yes, I realize this is very concerning for you, but we need to really focus on the economy".
Many of those economic issues are a source for other problems. Resolving them may not solve the other problems, but those other problems also can't be solved without dealing with one of the major causes first.
It's like having a house with a giant crack in the wall, and some people want to fix the foundation while some want to fix the crack. Fixing the foundation isn't going to fix the crack, but if you fix the crack without fixing the foundation, it's just going to break open again.
